Skip to main content

Full text of "Maryland Historical Magazine Summer 1975"

See other formats


BOARD OF EDITORS 

JOSEPH L. ARNOLD, University of Maryland, Baltimore County 

JEAN BAKER, Gaucher College 

GARY BROWNE, Wayne State University 

JOSEPH W. COX, Towson State College 

CURTIS CARROLL DAVIS, Baltimore 

RICHARD R. DUNCAN, Georgetown University 

RONALD HOFFMAN, University of Maryland, College Park 

H. H. WALKER LEWIS, Baltimore 

EDWARD C. PAPENFUSE, Hall of Records 

BENJAMIN QUARLF^ Morgan State College 

JOHN B. BOLES, Editor, Towson State College 

NANCY G. BOLES, Assistant Editor 

RICHARD J. COX, Manuscripts^ 

MARY K. MEYER, Genealogy 

MARY KATHLEEN THOMSEN, Graphics 



FORMER EDITORS 

WILLIAM HAND BROWNE, 1906-1909 
LOUIS H. DIELMAN, 1910-1937 
JAMES W. FOSTER, 1938-1949, 1950-1951 
HARRY AMMON, 1950 
FRED SHELLEY, 1951-1955- 
FRANCIS C. HABER, 1955-1958 
RICHARD WALSH, 1958-1967 
RICHARD R. DUNCAN, 1967-1974 



P. WILLIAM FILBY, Director 

ROMAINE S. SOMERVILLE, Assistant Director 



The Maryland Historical Magazine is published quarterly by the Maryland Historical Society, 201 W. 
Monument Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21201. Contributions and corcfspondence relating to articles, 
book reviews, and any other editorial matters should be addressed to the Editor in care of the Society. 
All contributions should be submitted in duplicate, double-spaced, and consistent with the form out- 
lined in A Manual of Style (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1969). The Maryland Historical 
Society disclaims responsibility for statements made by contributors. 

Composed and printed at Waverly Press, Inc., Baltimore, Maryland 21202. Second-class postage paid 
at Baltimore, Maryland. © 1975, Maryland Historical Society. 




MATTHEW TILGHMAN(1718-1790) 




Vol. 70 
No. 2 

StHiniBer 1975 
CONTENTS 

Elaine G. Breslaw The Chronicle as Satire: Dr. Hamilton's "History of 

the Tuesday Club" 129 

Katherine A. Harvey Building a Frontier Ironworks: Problems of Transport 

and Supply, 1837-1840 149 

David Winfred Gaddy William Norris and the Confederate Signal and 

Secret Service 167 

Charles M. Kimberly The Depression in Maryland: The Failure of Volun- 
taryism 189 

Sidelight 

Allan Kulikoff Black Society and the Economics of Slavery 203 

Notes on Maryland Historical Society 

Richard J. Cox A Bibliography of Articles and Books on Maryland 

History, 1974 211 

Mary K. Meyer Genealogica Marylandia: Maryland Muster Rolls, 

1757-1758 224 



Reviews of Recent Books 

Pon^t, Colmml New Jersey: A History, by Jerome Nade-lhaft • AMen, Robert Dinwiddie: Servant of the 
Crown, by Mftes M. Mwwin • C»Himm, The LoyaU$ts i'm Revolutimary America, 1760-1781, by Ralph 
Kett^am • Bridie, Thomm Mffetmn: Ah Intimate History, by Paul K. Conkia • Bales, America: The Mid- 
dle Period. Emays in Honor of Memard Mayo, by Thomas D. Clark • Morris, Free Men All: The Personal 
Liberty Laws of the North, 1780-1861, by Catherine M. Tarrant • Hobson, Serpent in Eden: H. L. 
Mencken and /*e South, by William J. Evitts • Jaber, The Rich, the Well Born, and the Powerful: Elites and 
Upper Classes in History, by Robert Forster 227 



Books Notes 



238 



THE EDITOR'S PAGE 



In last issue we outlined the editorial policy of the Maryland Historical 
Magazine, making clear that we hoped to publish good articles on every aspect 
of Maryland's history. Yet in addition to publishing articles, each issue of the 
MHM devotes considerable space to the reviewing of current books. That policy 
too should be made clear to our jeaders. 

Obviously many more titles are published each year than we can possibly 
notice, so we must limit our reviews to books on Maryland history and culture, 
the Middle Atlantic region or the South, and significant books of national scope. 
Other books sent us which do not properly fit the above categories are given a 
short description in the Book Notes section of the MHM. We use great care in 
matching our reviewers to the books, trying in every instance to choose the very 
best person. If a possible reviewer is a close friend of the author (or an enemy), 
or helped with the research or writing, or teaches at the same school, or attended 
the same graduate school, or has obvious ideological differences, we do not ask 
him to review the book. Our reviewers are drawn from a variety of fields and pro- 
fessions, but all share one trait in common: their expertise gives them special 
insight into the quality of the book under review. 

We see the reviewer as providing a highly useful service for the readers of the 
MHM. As a guide to whether certain books should be purchased or read, he is 
not intended to write uncritical advertising copy. We expect each reviewer to 
include a brief summary of the book, tell what kinds of evidence it is based upon, 
place it in its historiographical context, and indicate whether its assumptions, 
methodology, and conclusions seem warranted in his expert opinion. We want our 
reviewers to be honest and fair both to the author and the readers of the review. 
Pointing out petty errors should be avoided unless they are so extensive as to 
cloud the validity of the book itself. Book reviews, in short, are a kind of con- 
sumers' guide to historical publishing. 

Our reviews will in part mirror the current vogues of scholarship, and when 
books of unusual merit or importance are published, we shall submit them to a 
longer consideration in the format of a review essay published in the Sidelight 
section of the MHM. Readers will remember the essay on Daniel Boorstin's The 
Americans: The Democratic Experience which appeared last year. This issue 
carries Allan Kulikoff s perceptive critique of Time on the Cross. Such review 
essays, we believe, extend to our readers the excitement and controversy of 
historical scholarship. 

Most of our readers have neither the time nor opportunity to read archival 
materials or old newspapers and documents. Their access to history is through 
the pages of the MHM and published books. Our review policy then, bringing 
the best in recent historical scholarship to the informed attention of our readers, 
is to serve our audience. History is a constant dialogue between the past and 
present, and we hope to spark the conversation. 



John B. Boles 



The Chronicle as Satire: 
Dr. Hamilton's "History of 
the Tuesday Club" 

ELAINE G. BRESLAW 



o N A LOCKED SHELF IN THE RARE BOOK ROOM OF THE JoHNS HoPKlNS UNIVERSITY 

Library in Evergreen House, resting in inglorious obscurity, is the incomplete 
three-volume manuscript of Dr. Alexander Hamilton's "History of the Ancient 
and Honorable Tuesday Club," written between 1754 and 1756.' A handful of 
scholars have looked at it; some, discouraged by the task of deciphering the 
already fading ink and handling the disintegrating pages, have given it only a 
cursory glance; others, more persistent, more curious, have read parts of it, 
contemplated its literary value, and judged it a fine piece of early American 
satire. Carl Bridenbaugh called it some of the "best writing produced in the 
Chesape^e society" and indeed he felt that it "stood high among all colonial 
literary efforts" in its genre. ^ Richard Beale Davis has been more effusive in his 
praise and somewhat mystified because it is so often overlooked.' Recently J. A. 
Leo Lemay, who studied the manuscript very closely and is most familiar with all 
the doctor's writings, concluded that "in the future, Hamilton will rank as a 



Dr. Elaine G. Breslaw is an associate professor of historv- at Morgan State College. 

1. The "History" with the first and second volumes bound and an incomplete third volume unbound, 
together with some loose sheets from an earlier draft, were given to Dr. Upton Scot by Hamilton's 
widow, the former Rebecca Dulany. Scot thought that the loose sheets included a section from a 
fourth volume, but those pages appear to be a later section of volume three, pages 503 to 564, leaving a 
gap of almost 100 pages in the third volume. As far as I know, these intervening pages are missing. 
The manuscript subsequently was acquired by Judge George W. Dobbin who bequeathed it to Johns 
Hopkins University in 1892. The pages numbered 503 to 564 were separated from the rest of the 
manuscript and are now bound with the Maryland Historical Society copy of the Tuesday Club 
Record Book, MS 854. (Upton Scot to unidentified person, August 28, 1809, Howard Family , Papers, 
Maryland Historical Society; Extract of a letter from Scot, .August 28, 1809, bound into volume I of 
the "History," John Work Garrett Library of the Johns Hopkins University; and James Carroll to 
John Hoffman, May 4, 1824, Ibid.; Sarah Elizabeth Freeman, "The Tuesday Club Medal," The 
Numismatist, 58 [December 1945]; 1317.) Since the preparation of this article, Johns Hopkins 
University has laminated the pages of the manuscript to prevent further deterioration and has 
rebound the whole into six more easily usable volumes. 

2. Carl Bridenbaugh, Myths and Realities: Societies of the Colonial South (New York, 1962), p. 43. 

3. Richard Beale Davis, C. Hugh Holman, and Louis D. Rubin, eds.. Southern Writing, 1585-1920 
(New York, 1970), p. 159. 

' 129 

Maryland Historical Magazine 
Vol. 70, No. 2, Summer 1975 



130 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



majcfT American writer of neoclassical prose." The "History" itself he termed a 
"hrflliant" piece/ Yet the work remains unpublished. 

To begin to remedy this situation, a representative selection from Dr. 
Hamilton's satire follows this introduction. Only one other section of the 
manuscript has ever before appeared in print, that in the first issue of this 
Magazine in 1906.^ 

Dr. Hamilton's satire is ostensibly a takeoff on the activities of the Tuesday 
Club of Annapolis, a club which itself was devoted to humor and wit for learned, 
talented, and sophisticated Marylandera betwem the years 1744 and 1756.* It 
reproduces many of the speeches, poems, puns, and musical works written and 
composed by various members of the Club, but is edited to fit the satirist's 
purposes. Hamilton intended his "History" to reflect on the human condition 
and not just the small group of Annapolitans mentioned in it. It is a wry 
commentary on man, his (and her) foibles and illusions, his hypocrisies. Using 
language well stocked with obnoxious detail, replete with references to bodily 
functions, Hamilton consciously imitated the Grub Street wits in England. His 
mock-heroic style was also borrowed from the English satirists: Pope, Swift, 
Arbuthnot, Gay, and Middleton.' In addition to its literary and philosophical 
qualities, the "History" also affected an irreverent view of local Maryland 
polities and ilianners. The undertones of political and social criticism may well 
be more suggestive to the historian of the eighteenth century than its recognized 
literary merit. 

The manuscript also contains comical line drawings by Hamilton that 
emphasize the satirical nature of the work. The sketches are in the spirit of 
Hogarth, grotesques in visual form designed to complement the social comment 
of the prose. 

In arrangement the "History" comes closest to Henry Fielding's History of 
Tom Jones, Foundling.^ Every volume is divided into several books, each of 
which develops a theme, preceded by a long essay introducing the theme. The 



4. J. A. Leo Lemay, Men of Letters in Colonial Maryland (Knoxville, 1972), p. 213; Lemay, 
"Appendix," in Louis D. Rubin, ed., A Bibliographical Guide to the Study of Southern Litereetwe 
(Baton Rouge, 1969), p. 344. The only published work by Hamilton is his travel diary. It w(» meet 
recently edited by Carl Bridenbaugh as Gentleman's Progress: The Itinerarium of Dr. Alexmder 
Hamilton (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1948). 

5. "The Tuesday Club of Annapolis," Maryland Historical Magazine 1 (March 1906): 59-65. 

6. Joseph Towne Wheeler, "Reading and Other Recreations of Marylanders, 1700-1776," Maryland 
Historical Magazine 38 (March 1943): 53; Elaine G. Breslaw, "Wit, Whimsy and Politics: The Uses of 
Satire by the Tuesday Club of Annapolis, 1744 to 1756," William and Mary Quarterly 3d ser., 32 
(April 1975): 295-306. The actual minutes of the club's activities were kept by Dr. Hamilton in a 
Record Book that reached 2 volumes. One copy of volume one covering the minutes from 1744 to 1755 
is in the John Work Garrett Library and a second, revised version of the same volume is in the 
Maryland Historical Society MS 854. The single known copy of the second volume covering the 
minutes of May 27, 1755, to February 11, 1756, is in the Librairy of Congress MS Division. References 
to these Records are from the Garrett Library copy. The Record Book volunM tarta a separate, more 
factual, source of information on the club and should not be confused with the more imaginative 
"Histw." 

7. Hamilton, "History," 2:3, 35; Pat Rogers, Grub Street: Studies in a Subculture (London, 1972), 
p. 3. 

8. Lemay, Men of Letters, pp. 250-51. 



The Chronicle as Satire 



131 



a 

of ^ 



f^Usvt. tpt^.Cinr^riA(^iUt.fnritt*S ouxf cummin i j 




Title page of volume 1. Hiotograph by Jemme Breskm, cmtrtmy The John Work-Garrett 
Library ofJt^ms M^t^ lMtmem^ 



132 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



topics ranged from "A Modest Proposal, for the New Modelling and Improve- 
ment of our Moderen Theatre." to a parody on social forms in an essay entitled 
"Concerning Ceremonies and their great use and Significancy, in Civil life, and 
in Clubs," and a burlesque on political events, the "Importance & Significancy of 
ensigns and Symbols of authority and State, and a dissertation Concerning the 
balance of power." ^ Following each essay are selected "Clubical" (meaning 
humoroijs) activities di'^Med imto chapters ta ffltestrate the themes. The contrast 
in values between the lofty theme of the essay and the prosaic, lowly, somewhat 
crude Club activities that misrepresent the ideals, gives the work its characteris- 
tically satiric tone.'" 

The members of the Club appear with humorous names to lampoon the 
personal characteristics, either physical, intellectual, or occupational, of the 
members, or in som« cases pardSy ihe ¥#Ie played in the Club, in a style 
reminiscent of Byrd's Secret History of the Line.^^ Thomas Bacon appeared as 
Signior Lardini, a poor joke on his name and a comment on his roles as musician 
and composer — char«ctt*i!Bties iftlribwted to Italians at the time. Jonas Green, 
the Poet Laureat, known for his ability to consume huge quantities of liquor, was 
dubbed Jonathan Grog. Alexander Hamilton, because of his roles as Secretary 
and orator and in a reference to his pretensions as a satirist, called himself 
Loquacious Scribbler. William Thornton, the Attorney General of the province, 
was Solo Neverout, a tribute to political tenacity, and Walter Dulany was called 
Slyboots Pleasant no doubt also" bfecattse of a-parti«ilar polMcal style. 

The President of the Club, Charles Cole, called in the "History" Nasifer Jole, 
holds a peculiar position in the satire and in the Club itself. He appears to be a 
som«(?kat dtill individual lacking in the talents usually associated with the group 
of wits. He did not play a musical instrument, nor participate in the singing. He 
did not write poetry. He took no part in the punning and generally exhibited a 
lack of huraOT. He did lay a very sumptuous tabl« and was expected to pd-ovide 
elaborate meals. His very limited intellectual role is a satire on the Proprietary, 
which is thereby described as a lavish giver of favors through patronage, but 
singularly lacking in any means necessary to satisfy the practical needs of 
Maryland society. This is no doubt an apt description of the Sixth and last Lord 
Baltimore: the dissolute dilletante, Frederick.'^ The President of the Club was 
assumed to be necessary to the proper functioning of the society — who else would 
provide favors — but like Frederick, he made no other positive contribution. He 
did have the power of appointment and the authority to pass on laws, rights he 
wielded arbitrarily. As a result the patronage and bemevolence of the executive 
was judiciously wooed in the Club as he was in the province — thus fhi rffusive 
odes to the President delivered by the Poet Laureat. 

9. HamiltcHi, "History," 2:181-202; 3:167-84; 2:388-49. 

10. On the nature of satire and its eighteenth-century literary expressions I have relied on the 
analyses of W. 0. S. Sutherland, T/ie Art of the Satirist: Essays on the Satire of Augustan England 
(Austin, 1965) and David Worcester, The Art of Satire (Cambridge, Mem., 1940). 

11. William K. Byrd, ed., William Byrd's Histories of the Dividing Line Betwixt Virginia and North 
Carolina, with a new Introduction by Percy G. Adams (New York, 1967). 

12. William Hande Brown et al., ed.. Archives of Maryland, (Baltimore, 1883-), 50: viii. Henceforth 
Archives of Md. 



The Chronicle as Satire 



133 



The Club membCTS had coined terms to give distinction to their activities and 
Hamilton used the "Clubical" jargon in his satire. Of especial importance was 
the word "gelastic" — from the Greek word tor laughter. A major rule of the Club 
called the Gelastic Rule banned all direct references to politics or sensitive issues 
in the colony.^' Only indirect, humorous, and therefore gelastic commentary was 
permitted. Anyone violating the rule was subject to derisive laughter from the 
company. The word thus implied a sophisticated level of irreverent humor and 
also an invitation to enjoy the low comedy of the Club's frivolity. 

The following excerpt taken from the third volume, pages 349 to 369, begins 
with a relatively s-hort, untitled, introductory piece on mankind's treachery and 
lack of sincerity. Its general theme is typical of others in the "History," but it 
also succinctly recapitulates a multitude of topics explored in more lengthy detail 
in earlier essays. In it Hamilton comments on the weaknesses and trickery of 
those in power, the misuse of religion to support the status quo, the short- 
sightedness of scientists, the degeneration of society, and the consequent need 
to us« laughter as an antidote to such human foolishness. Throughout this sec- 
tion as in much of the "History," there is a pointed reference to the insincerity 
of politicians swayed by the turns of fortune and the weakness of aristocrats sub- 
ject to flattery. 

The meeting used as an illustration of those follies took place on June 11, 1754, 
at the celebration of the ninth anniversary of the Club. In attendance that 
evening were Charles Cole, William Thornton, Jonas Green, Walter Dulany, 
William Lux, Reverend Alexander Malcolm, and Dr. Alexander Hamilton, the 
regular or "Longstanding" members, and Daniel Dulany, Jr., and Dr. Upton 
Scot, strangers visiting the Club for the evening only. " 

The group had not met since March 26th of that year, the longest hiatus in its 
existence. Because of the imminent danger of French and Indian attacks on the 
Maryland borders and a governmental crisis at the same time, the energies of 
most leaders were directed toward the military effort or gaining support for their 
political position.'* Club members were too involved in serious business to take 
the time to attend to their satires and practice their wits. The local situation, 
however, provided the framework for Hamilton's comedy. 

The Maryland satirist intended this section in his "History" as an ironic 
commentary on the divisive governmental crises of 1754. At the time the 
Proprietor's prerogative to control license fees was under direct attack by the 
Assembly, which itself was under pressure to finance the early days of the French 
and Indian War. The Lower House of the Assembly would not budge from its 
position to refuse to appropriate money unless the Proprietor would give up his 
prerogative rights to fees and fines. The result was stalemate and the governor 
several times prorogued the Assembly during the winter of 1753-54." Thus the 
Club itself was seen to suffer from a "long Interrugnum" brought on by the 
selfishness of the members. Hamilton mocked the virtual paralysis of govern- 

13. Tuesday CliA Records, June 18, 1745. 

14. Ibid., Juae 11, 1754. Scot was elected a regular member shortly afterwards. 

15. Archives of Md., 50: vii. 

16. Ibid., 50: xi, xix, xxii, 206, 210-11, 256, 261. 



134 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



ment in Maryland by comparing the Club's degradation to that of the decline of 
ancient Rome. He used a high burlesque technique of exploiting the grand theme 
for a trifling occurrence. The noble became the ignoble and the laughter invoked 
as a result of the ludicrous comparison was a wry recognition of the dissension in 
the General Assembly. 

Hamilton makes one very oblique reference to the anti-Catholic scare that 
gripped the colony during the early years of the war. In listing all the reasons for 
the impending downfall of the Club, he includes the holding of "sham Clubs or 
illegal Committees" and suggests that the enactment of "severe penal laws" 
against such committees was necessary to protect the Club. The Maryland 
Assembly at the time was considering such stringencies to restrict the province's 
Catholic population. In addition, the more narrow-minded Anglican clergy held 
an unauthorized meeting to discuss ways to further harass the "Papists." It is 
both that meeting and the irrational fear of the local Roman Catholics that 
Hamilton lampoons. The doctor like many other enlightened Protestants in the 
colony was in favor of religious toleration even though he strongly disapproved of 
Roman Catholic dogma, stigmatizang it in this selection as "dam'd Impudent 
lies." 

Many allusions of the "History" are typically eighteenth century and reflect a 
sensitivity to Enlightenment ideals. Hamilton quotes puns and out-of-context 
statements from Latin authorities to lend weight to his arguments. This is 
intended as a parody on the reliance on authority so long enjoyed by scholars and 
theologians. Hamilton lampoons ceremonies which have lost their original 
purpose and have become their own reason for being. The false front of ceremony 
was as unenlightened as the reliance on Latin authorities. 

In a familiar (fecfhoing of the eighteen-century English whig fear of luxury and 
decadence," the doctor lauds the earlier, more primitive, frugal era of the Club's 
development, before the advent of sit-down dinners and self-indulgence. As a 
physician he could not resist adding the fillip about the elaljorate meals of the 
century, not just because of the overeating that was destructive of their 
constitutions, but the waste of time in idle dinner conversation. Such social 
occasions, which were the hallmark of southern society, added nothing to the 
health and happiness of mankind and diverted minds from more important 
concerns. 

The doctor's political leanings were conventionally whig: his philosophy was an 
amalgam of the ideas of John Locke and Montesquieu. He felt that the best 
protection for a free people against a tyrant was in maintaining a balance not just 
of the three estates praised by the Frenchman, but also of the Lockean balance 
between executive prerogative and legislative privilege. Hamilton's scathing 
ridicule of the corruption of that ideal is evident in the trivial commentary that 



17. Ibid., 50:199-202; Thomas Bacon, "Proceedings of the Parochial Clergy," Maryland Historical 
Magazine 3(December 1908): ^4-84. 

18. Bernard Bailyn, Ideological Origins of the American Revoluthn (Cambridge, Mass., 1967), p. 49; 
Gladys Bryson, Man and Society: Tfee S»mish Inquiry of the Eighteenth Century (Princeton, 19ffi), 
p. 79; H. Trevor Colboume, The Lamp of Experience: Whig History and the Intellectual Origins of 
the American Revolution (Chapel Hill, 1965), p. 50. 



The Chronicle as Satire 



135 



the President of the Club had the prerogative to hear the speech as the members 
of the Club had the privilege to utter the anniversary speech. 

Typical of the other satirists of cefrCttry, HmHTfton was fasCirtated by the 
theater as is demonstrated by his extensive use of dramatic allusions and 
dialogue. In much of the "History" he adds stage direction and asides in brackets, 
most of which are absent from the factual records. These theatrical techniqaes 
serve to remove the dramatic personages in the "History" further from the actual 
people in the Club and make the characters more representative of generalized 
human folly. The Maryland satirist could conceive of no more effective vehicle to 
point up the incongruities of the human condition than through the stage. 

In the use of dialogue, Hamilton preserved %he pronunciation of the time and 
thus gives an added dimension to an urideinikmdiati <rf tl»e eighteenth-century 
American world. It is noticeable tiiat the mAga^ pronunciation of give me still 
sounds as it did then: "gi'me." 

A note on punctuation and capitalization. The original punctuation has been 
changed to make the selection more readable. Dr. Hamilton did not bother with 
periods, and did not begin new sentences with capital letters. Some of the 
commas have been removed where they intwfiHred with an understanding of the 
text. Eighteenth-century spelling has been retained except in the case of "fs" 
which has been modernized to the double "ss." I have tried to maintain 
consistency in the spelling and theretfore obvious errors of transmission from the 
records have been corrected. The footnotes in the original are indicated by the 
use of letters which was Dr. Hamilton's practice; editorial footnotes are 
numbered. 

CHAPTER IV 

Celebration of the Ninth Anniversarv, Anniversary Speech and ode. 

Democritus the Philosopher has been much wondered at, and much blamed for 
his Laughing humor by persons of a particular solemn and grave turn and, for 
this Reason, has had the character of a Coxcomb and Impertinent Buffoon. But 
if one Seriously Considers the humors of this Transitory world in which we live, 
he will wonder how any person can be so stupid as to forbear laughing at almost 
every occurrence that happens around us. Would it not provoke one to laughter to 
observe on what the Generality of men place their esteem; to see how the 
Philosopher, as well as the fool, is mistaken in opinion, in reckoning the 
wealthiest always the best; to observe a Set of domineering Insolent puppies, 
endeavoring to sink a noble and generous spirit by accumulating misery upon it, 
while all their dirty labor is Laughd at the dispised by the Heroical, resolute 
and Brave; to see politicians and projectors, noted for their wisdom and Sagacity, 
like the Spoke in Sesostris' Chariot wheeP" turned up and down from begging to 



19. Democritus, ca. 460, was nicknamed "the laughing philosopher" after his death although during 
his liletime he yrm known as "Wisdom" for bis eracy^opedic kiMwledge. Oxford Classical Dictionary 
(Oxfofd, 1949), q.v. 

20. Sesostris was a mythical Egyptian king mentioned by Herodotus who ascribed to him great 
conquests in Africa and Asia (Ibid.). 



136 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



honor, and from honor to begging again; to see the Incommensurable flow of idle 
Compliments, that are current among people of fashion and grimace, which, like 
Sham bills of Credit pass Current for friendship; to see Machiavels maxims held 
in greater Repute than the Scriptures, and the Gospel of truth, and trick and 
Chicaiiery pass for wisdom, while honcH' and Integrity and candor, are esteemed 
words of no signffic«lion, but Ittve^d to gtiW siiffple fellows and fools; to see 
Justice bought and sold in our Courts of Law and equity, as if money Carried a 
more Convincing argument with it than truth; to see a Rich fool see a knave of a 
Physician and pay a Wockhead of aii apottieCary to deprive him of health, under a 
pretence of Restoring it. Its as if God made work for fools to mend: to see a silly 
hoijaewife pay a Tinker for stofiptng one hole in her pot or kettle, and making two 
in it's stead; to s6e how double tC)ngQe#€a)ttwy, with the slipperiness of a Snake, 
creeps into favor and Esteem with the gf6&tj till it Empoisons and Corrodes their 
Substance; to see Papists, and other wrong headed bigots Invent and publish 
dam'd Impudent lies, to support their villanous religion, That they may not only 
cozen the present age, but Impose upon Simple and Credulous posterity; to See 
well meaning and honest Simplicity laugh'd at, and made a tool of to serve 
wicked purposes; to see Religion, that venerable name made a vizor for villanous 
politicians, assumed or thrown aside, as occasion requires; to See Rogues of low 
degree exalted on a gallows or gibbet, and greater rogues of high degree elevated 
to places of honor and prcrfit, the badge of the first, the more honest of the two, 
not from nature but necessity, being a hempen halter,'" and the symbol of the 
other, a diadem, a Golden Chain, or a Star and Garter; to See human wit and 
Cunning, eagerly employed in finding out the arcana of nature, with deep and 
curious Scrutiny, and at last discovering neither more nor less, than that a straw 
is a straw, and an atom an atom. I say who can see or observe this medley of 
absurdity without Laughing, Immoderately, either with Democritus, or any other 
Gelastic Philosopher; and who can blame the members of the ancient and 
honorable Tuesday Club, for Laughing at all the world, as well as at themselves, 
and furnishing a fund of Laughter to all those who have a turn for the Gelastic 
humor, since their main delight and pleasure is only to Laugh and be laughed at, 
and, in fine, who can blame them for Laughing Immoderately, at the Clubical 
altercations between the honorable the President and venerable The 
Chancellor." 

At Sederunt 222" was Celebrated the Ninth Anniversary of the Ancient and 
Honorable Tuesday Club When Mr. Secretary Scribble, by the Grace, favor and 
Condescention of his honor the President Served as H[igh] S[teward]." The 
members, at this anniversary, were all, except the President who had his Chair of 
State, seated in Windsor Chairs, ornamented with their Badge of medals. What 
the Intention or meaning of this was cannot be conjectured, unless it was only a 
mere piece of State or Grandure, which this Club was apt to assume to them- 



21. A noose. 

22. Reverend Alexander Malcolm was the Club Chancellor. His pseudonym was Philo Dogmaticus. 

23. Each meeting of the group was called a Sederunt, from the Latin to sit. The Sederunts are 
numbered consecutively in the factual records and carried over to the "History." 

24. The high steward was the host for the evening. The members rotated in that position. 



The Chronicle as Satire 




Self-portrait of Dr. Alexander Hamilton. Photograph by Jerome Breslaw, cour- 
tesy The John Work Garrett Library of Johns Hopkins University 



138 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



selves at Certain times without giving or even having any particular reason for it, 
but mere whim. 

After Supper, the Secretary as orator of the Club, stood up in his place, and 
delivered an anniversary speech as follows: 

ANNIVERSARY SPEECH, delivered by *e Orator 
May it Please your honor, 

and ttrttee here L[ong] S[tanding] Members of this here anct & hon'ble 
Club. 

The practise of Delivering Anniversary speeches, has been received and 
prevailed much in otb^ Clubs, as well as in this here Club. Permit me to quote a 
few authorities. The famous Cardan Says, verba propter res, et res propter verba; 
and Philo Says, qui Rebus Se exercet, verba neghgit, et qui callet, artem dicendi, 
nullam disciplinam habet recognitam, and the wise Sen«ca, Cujuscunque 
orationem vides, politam et Solicitam Certo Animam in pusillis occapatum in 
Scriptis nihil Solidum." Many eminent orators have shone in this particular 
[wovince erf eloquence among whom I, as a Club orator (tho' modesty forbids me 
to assume the first rank among these Ingenious gentlemen) have from time to 
time (as your honor, and these here Longstanding members must know and 
Confess) made no Contemptible figure in the exercise of my office. 

Anniversary orations are certainly not only decent and becoming, but 
absolutely necessary in all Clubs, who have any regular Constitution or policy, 
especially in those where that excellent form of mixed government exists, called 
the thrice estates, I mean, where the Society is governed by a President, Su- 
preme head or Archon, State officers, Nobles or Magnates and officers of the 
Commons, or Tribuni Plebis. TTie two cardinal points or hinges upon which such 
a government moves are Prerogative and privilege of the members under his 
sway. These two points necesarily exist in a free government and therefore exist 
in this here Club, the Governmeiit ctf ^R^lch ifs yet, I hope, under proper restric- 
tions, and the members, in some measure, free. Therefore, as it is a part of the 
prerogative of an honorable President to hear an anniversary Speech every year, 
so it is the undoubted privilege of aay (me, or all of the members of a free Club, to 
pronounce, or utter such an anniversary Speech, or Speeches to the honorable the 
Chair. This valuable privilege, our ancient & honorable Club have thought fit by 
custom to lay Intirely upon my Shoulders, making me, as it were, the mouth of 
the society to deliver their sentiments on these Grand and solemn occasions to 
your honorable Chair, and if my memory does not deceive me, this is the ninth 
time that I have officiated as an anniversary orator to your honor & these here 
Longstanding members, and held forth laboriously and pathetically, amidst a 
group of laughers, listners. Grumblers and Sleepers, for, certain it is that upon 
the return of every occasion of this s<xt, some have laughed either at your 
Orator's person, action or discourse, or altogether, some have listened attentively 

25. Cardan: "Words because of deeds, and deeds because of words." Philo: "Whoever involves 
himself in deeds neglects rhetoric, and whoever is versed in [or is insensible toward] the art of 
speaking has no recognized knowledge." Seneca: "Whoever's oration you see to be both polished and 
restless, certainly [you see] his spirit is engrossed in trifles and there is nothing solid in his writings. 
Translations from the Latin by Carl Carlson, Curator of Coins, Evergreen Foundation. 



The Chronicle as Satire 



139 



with ears wide, and mouths wider open, some again have Grumbled and 
muttered between their teeth at what was said, and exclaimed Impatiently, that 
there was too much of this stuff, when your orator had scarce gone thro' his 
Exordium, while some. Insensible of either mirth or anger, have sunk into soft 
Repose and balmy sleep, lulled by the mere sound of the orators voice. Such 
members, I could, if I would, now point out to your honor, but I prudently shun 
being particular, for fear of giving offence. 

Since then, The absolute necessity of anniversary speeches in free Clubs is 
evident, I hope (pardon me if I say it, for you know it to be true) tho' our Club has 
for some time passed drooped, yet this laudable Custom must not be dropped, 
and therefore, I must beg your honor's patience, and the patience of these here 
Longstanding members, to Indulge my oratorical Loquacity for a few minutes 
while I deliver what may be proper to be delivered, on such a Sublime occasion, 
as this here present anniversary. 

Our Anniversary, honorable Sir, which has hitherto been an occasion of 
Rejoicing and mirth, a day of singing, fiddling, dancing. Jesting, drinking, eating 
and laughing, a day of pomp, show and magnificence, grandure and triumph, 
which has hitherto given great solace and Joy to the Longstanding memb«:s, is 
now (I am miry to say it, and particularly Oh this occasion when such complaints 
may seem Improperly urged) likely to become a humdrum, dull, moaping day of 
dejection, a spiritless, tasteless and tedious pastime to the Longstanding 
members, who caimot but perceive a great decline and falling away, of the 
wonted Glory and magnificence of this here Club; evident and apparent by the 
late long adjournments it has undergone, the very last Club preceeding this 
present Anniversary, having been held on the 2®th of March last, and not one 
Single Sederunt Intervening. 0 Lamen table! TlNitlor the space of almost three 
months, the honor, Glory and dignity of this ®ur Ancient and honorable Club, 
should be buried and Enveloped, in datfcness and oblivion, whilst no body can 
tell for what. 

Did I say, honorable Sir, no body can tell for what? I grant it, perhaps more out 
of Complaisance to your honor and this here ancient and honorable Club than for 
any truth the assertion contains in itself, because I wcmld shmn gitring offence, 
especially to great men and State officers, but surely a man must be vmy short 
sighted, if he cannot at least conjecture fot what. Permit me then to trespass a 
little on your time and patience, while I offer my conjectures. 

May I not then be allowed to conjecture, for I dare not proceed to positive 
assertions, that Luxury has in a great measure got footing in this here ancient and 
honorable Club. Luxury, in the opinion of all wise men has been the bane and 
ruin of States and Nations, and therefore must at last be the ruin of Clubs where 
it has been admitted. Are there not longstanding members here present who have 
seen the primitive times of this here ancient and honorable Club? Did they not in 
a little time"" see an end to that virtuous and heroic frugality, that prevailed in 
it at its firrt Institution? tfeve t-h^ not seen Luxury peeping from behind the 
scene, and preparing for her pompous entry upon this Clubical Stage? Have they 



(a). Vide vol. 1, Book 3, beginning of Chap. 5, page 179 verbatim almost with this. 



I 



140 Maryland Historical Magazine 

not Seen this bold actress take one great Stride at her first advance, and proceed 
afterwards, with a grand pas, to expell Simplicity and plainness from the Club, 
and Introduce pomp, show and Extravagance, her Constant pages and attend- 
ants, while another, her CoffiiipMtwt; j|Ml:f(lMti^^ with the like btrekined pride, 
played the part of a momus or mimicf fiwst^ less a person than Ceremony, 
as much a beau as the other is a belle, you have seen also showing his 

pragmatical front, on the most conspicuous part of the Scene, and Introducing 
Certain fantastical punctillios, forms and modes, by which he has so disguised 
and Intoxicated the behavior and manners of the l[ong] St[anding] members of 
this here anct. & hon'ble Cltib (as iftdeed he does those of all mankind especially 
such as are in high life), for he never shows his face among beggars and clowns 
that they now seem not to be the same persons that they were at their first 
Institution. 

Happy,"" thrice happy, in those heroic times of Innocence & Simplicity, 
were the Longstanding members of this here anc. & hon'ble Club, for then, with- 
out molestation could they sit with their legs across, loll upon a table or elbow 
chair, smoke their pipes, kiss the bowl or the glass in their turns, converse upon 
Clubical matters, either grave or facetious, drink toasts, either loyal or amorous, 
crack jokes, frame puns or Conundrums, and should their stomachs call for a 
whet, without Ceremony or trouble to themselves or fellow members, they might 
rise up, go to the Side board & after having taken their Sliver of Gammon or Slice 
of Cheese, Standing, Return again to their Compotation, Jocosity or Clubical 
Conversation. How Charming, how regular and how like the Simple frugality of 
the Golden age was this and how different from the present luxury and 
profuseness that prevails in most clubs, when the whole apparatus of a formal 
Table is Introduced, the Club room is pestered with the passing and repassing of 
Servants, the hobnails of whose shoes, make a miserable Clamping on the planks, 
and, when this is over, it proves only a prologue to the confusion and needless 
ceremony that succeeds, for, as soon as the H. S. gives the signal that supper 
waits, there is hawking of chairs, crossing over, casting off, figuring in, galloping 
up, right and left and back to back like people at a Country dance. There 
is — Pray Gentlemen, take your places, as the H. St'd's prologue — there is grace to 
be said, of which, not one word can be heard for Talking and laughing, then 
follows sharp rebuke from the Chaplain, and grumblings from the offending 
members. Next it is — pray take a seat — pray sit here sir — heres enough of 
room — excuse me Sir — I never eat Supper Sir, — I seldom Sup a nights Sir — for 
my part, I never Sup Sir. Then Comes the Table Conversation — here boy — some 
bread — pray Shove that dish this way — who carves best — what do you chuse 
Sir — pray Gi'me leave to help you — Shall I help you to this — Shall I help you to 
that — Sir you most humble — any part good Sir, 'tis all the same to me. Pray Sir, 
help yourself, and please yourself — hold good Sir — here's enough — Shall I help 
you to some sauce — yes Sir, you know I'm pretty saucy — will you have some 
gravy — no Sir, I'm grave enough already — please to hand me that mus- 
tard — pugh, 'tis damn'd strong, it makes me cry without a cause as Hob did for 



(b). Vide Vol. I, lib. HI, chap. 3, page 148, almost verbatim the same with this paragraph. 



The Chronicle as Satire 



141 



wi. fyi^^^nn^ iUx. ^i(yrf ^i^ett U ^ a r^^^e tt^/fu r«,^a I'R^v. 

Oti*lmt«^rtn/t%i ■ ^1 M«o»r-o»'*«'V- 

^^:llll!Wipliilii6^ 



Typical manuscript page of History of the Tuesday Club. Photograph by Jmme.Mmsiim^ emrtesy 
The John Work Garrett Library of Johns Hopkins University. 



Maryland Historical Magazine 






Typical manuscript page of History of the Tuesday Club. Photography by Jerome Breslaw, 
courtesy The John Work Garrett Library of Johns Hopkins University. 



The Chronicle as Satire 



143 



his grandmother — please to shove the vinegar cruet this way — a clean plate 
there — Coming Sir! this is fine veal, that's delicious mutton, these apples are 
well baked — Pho! I have burnt my mouth with that damned app\e pye 'tis 
damnation hot— These cheese cakes are not done — of all things commend me to 
pudding — do you love cold pudding Sir — not I sir, my love is settled — a knife and 
fork there — pan sir! — yes Sir! — pray sir eat 'tother Custard — boy, some small 
beer — a glass of wine you — this minute Sir — Sir my humble services — Sir your 
health — yours Sir — and yours Sir — and yours Sir — your most obedient humble 
servant — pledge you Sir — fill me a glass of claret there ho — avast, you Son of a 
bitch none of your Bumpers, damn you— Pray Sir give me a slice of that 
tongue — I thought you had got tongue enough already — well, come away, let's 
have at this turkey and these oysters — my starts and garter, what a twist of the 
under Jaw you have got — I play a good knife and fork, thanks be praised — Hie 
Lord make us thankful — here take away — and so they get up, one by one and fall 
to picking their teeth sauntering about the Room, or standing with their bums to 
the fire. I would ask what pleasure there cam be in all this, except that of eating & 
drinking, which as it is a pleasure we enjov in Common with the brute, and, often 
employ to more wicked purposes, the destruction of health and Constitution, we 
ought to glory but little in as the Pious Mr. Dods, the Reverend Mr. Dolittle, and 
several other Learned divines tell us. As for the table Conversation on these 
occasions, have I not Just now given a Specimen of it? Is it anything but mere 
Balderdash, so confused and so noisy, that I defy the wisest head in Christendom 
to make any thing of it? And, after all Impediments are removed & the Club 
forms itself round the Great table to smoke and drink, how dull, how sleepy are 
the members, when their stomachs are overcharged, how flat, how low the 
Conversation, what yawning, what streching of limbs, what nodding, what- 
Sleeping, what Snoring, or rather driving of hogs. Oh! Oh! 'tis Lamentable to 
behold, how much better to have spent the time in witty conversation such as 
punning, framing quaint Conundrums, cracking of sly Jokes, telling comical 
stories, singing old Catches or composing quaint Rhimes. But alas! all this is only 
preaching to the wind, and beating the air in vain, for, one may preach to 
eternity, and never reform the manners of Clubs, nay more, the manners of 
mankind in general, till the example of Great men and presidents show them the 
way. 

I might take occasion to observe here, since I have mentioned great men and 
Presidents, how people in Eminent Stations"^' will sometimes, by artful meth- 
ods gain upon the affections of the vulgar, when they observe a mild, easy, and 
condescending deportment and behavior towards them, and, when they heap 
benefits and favors upon them unasked. May not this have been the case with a 
Certain great man, and the L. S. members of this here anct. & hon. Club. Have 
we not seen one with a Complaisant and mild Countenance always adorned with a 
smile, like Julius Caesar of old, (pardon honorable Sir, the uncouth Comparison 
between a Christian president, and a heathen Emperor) flatter the people, that 
by gaining the ascendant over their affections, he might with more ease seize the 



(c). Vide, vol. 1, lib. Ill, chap. 8, page 201, almost verbatim the same with this. 



144 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



Tyranny into his own hands, and govern their persons, as he thought fit? No 
bounty was spared in the way of entertaining. Rack, that expensive liquor, has 
been Introduced. Rack! so bewitching to our refined palats, because fare fetched 
large tables have been set out, covered with clean fine liliiitett; Mc^ly'jpfeiSied, aiid 
sweetly perfumed, with lavender and roses, elegant dishes of meat, and exquisite 
deserts, have been Curiously ranged thereon, the Rooms and passage Splendidly 
Illuminated with Scottce limits, in the •forttis of Rhombus's squares, triangles and 
Circles, vocal music has been warbled forth most mellifluously, an Iced Cake 
made its appearance, which was dealt about in Luncheons to the members, 
curiously Enveloped in Clean white paper. IMs Cake, Ais fatal cake, may we not 
conjecture compleated the catastrophe of the Liberty of this here ancient and 
honorable Club, and, as Esau sold his birthright to Jacob, for fair words and a 
mess of porridge, so, this unhappy Club has bartered their liberty to a certain 
great man, for an old Song, rack punch, Plumb pudding, four pounds of candles, 
and an Iced Cake. 

But, tho' I condemn the Conduct of this here Club in this here particular affair, 
yet, that I may do strict Justice to that there great and Illustrious personage, I am 
sincerely of opinion that this here Club, could not have pitched upon a milder 
and more Complacent governor than he, for, has he not at all times shown 
himself modereat, gentle and easy to be Intreated. and, excepting only in that 
point, of giving up the least article or particle of his valuable prerogative, a point 
of which all princes and Great men, are very tender and Jealous, a point, of 
which, he is Justly tenaceous, he has spared no pains to humor this here Club in 
every thing that they desired. But, what tho' this here Club be in a great measure 
happy and easy, under the administration and government of this here 
accomplished and polite Archon, yet, it cannot with any certainty be expected 
that it will always remain so under that of his Successors, who, not regarding his 
excellent example, may turn out to be Cruel & blood minded tyrants. 

And now, honorable Sir, and gentlemen, I think having discussed this point of 
Luxury, I have dispatched the burden of the Song. But permit me, before I 
conclude this long speech to make a few more conjectures concerning the causes 
of the decline of this here Club. 

May we not reasonably conjecture that Certain bickering and contentions of 
late, sprang up among us in a great measure contributed to eclipse the Glory of 
this here Club, so that to use nigh the words of a late celebrated poet, it has been 
with us, as with the Oliverian Saints. 

Here civil dudgeon has grown high 
and We fell out. we knew not why 
While hard words. Jealousies & fears 
Set us together by the ears. 
And now have we been set by the ears, may we not reasonably conjecture, by the 
ambition and pride of our Great men, striving for power and Influence. 
Lamentable was the day in which so many state officers were appointed in this 
here Club, woeful was the accursed time when a great Seal and bag were thrown 
in among us as a bone of contention, dreadful was the period, when titles of honor 
and badges of State were bestowed upon some restless and aspiring spirits who 



The Chronicle as Satire 



145 



knew how to abuse them, but not well how to use them. Let us run a parallel 
between this here ancient club & the Roman Republic & see how their 
Circumstances & fate agree. 

In the beginHsii^ of the Roman Republic, there subsisted a Jealousy or 
Contention between the Patricians or nobles and the Plebians or Common 
people. Has not a Jealousy and contention also existed from the very beginning in 
this here Club, between the State officers and the Commons? Were not the 
Tribunes of the people established at Rome for the Security of the Commons who 
used to controul the votes of the Senate with a veto? Were there not officers of the 
Commons also appointed in this here Club, who have often had the assurance to 
controul the votes of the State officers? Were there not two Triumvirates 
established at Rome? Are there not also two triumvirates established in this here 
Club? One Extraneous, on the eastren shore,'* thp other within its very bowels, 
under the Color of a Champion, a Chancellor, and an Attorney General? 
Was there not a perpetual dictatorship established at Rome by Julius Caesar? 
Has not this here Club saddled themselves with a perpetual Dictatw, under the 
title of a perpetual president? Did not the Chief magistrate of Rome assume to 
himself the title of Imperator? Was not the title of my Lord given to the presi- 
dent of this here Club? Did not the Emperor sit between Two Consuls in the 
Senate at Rome? Does not the president of this here Club, Sit, in Club between 
his two satellites or Satrapae, the Champion & Chancellor? Did not the army as- 
sume a governing power for a Considerable time at Rome? Has not Sir John, for 
a considerable time assumed by virtue of his broad sword a governing power in 
this here Club? Was not Rome for some time governed by the Councils of loose 
women and Courtezmns? Has not there also been a genearchy in this here Club? 
Did not the Romans go to an excess of luxury in buildings, feasts, public shows, 
and Spectacles? Has not this here ancient & honorable Club, gone to an excess 
of Luxury in feastings, badges, canopies, and processions? Did not Rome at last 
sink by degrees from a State of liberty into a State of abject slavery? Have we not 
reason to believe that as the political State of Rome, and that of this here Club 
seem to be parallel, that if we drive on, Jehu like, in this manner, this here club, 
will at last, sink into a state of Slavery. Has not moderen Rome at last, submitted 
to be ruled by an old priest and his myrmidons? May we not conjecture, that this 
ancient and honorable Club, once it becomes a Moderen Club, will be priest 
ridden, if the presumption and petulance of a certain great Club officer, the 
Chancellor be suffered to go on. [Chancellor: Aha! is it come to that!]'^ 



26. Thomas Bacon, FJobert Morris, and John Gordon established a group cEilled the Eastern Shore 
Triumvirate in Talbot County . They served as the nucleus for a gfnttemen's society in that rural area. 
Earlier in the satire Hamilton accused Bacon and his friends oh the eastern shore of forming a cabal to 
undermine the authority of the Club President. The doctw i»ed Iskat "clubical" incident to lampoon 
the Country Party, the anti-Proprietary or opposition group, m the colony ("History," 2:87; 219). 
(d). Sir John had not as yet declared that he had left the Club. 

27. The brackets are in the original. The accusation is a derogatory reference to a speech made by 
another clergyman, Thomas Cradock, an advocate of a resident bishop in the colonies. David Curtis 
Skaggs, "Thomas Cradock's Sermon on the Governance of Maryland's Established Church," William 
and Mary Quarterly, 3d ser., 27 (October 1970): 630-53. On the episcopal issue in the colonies, the 
most comprehensive work is Arthur L. Cross, The Anglican Episcopate and the American Colonies 
(New York, 1902). 



146 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



In fine, honorabte Sir, and O^tlemen, I have p^eiumed to lay all those matters 
before you, that you may have a clear view of the present deplorable State of this 
here ancient and honorable Club, and the ruin that threatens it, if proper means 
&te BHit'tteed to prevent it. Therefore, you will Remain without excuse if you do 
not use these means, which are to reinstate the Club in its ancient simple 
constitution with regard to expences, to secure to his honor the president his Just 
prerogative, to curb and restrain the growing power of your State officers, to keep 
within proper bounds the Influence of the Great Seal, to regulate the presumptive 
claims of the officers of the Commons, to provide that Commissions be duely and 
regularly Sealed and Issued, not only for deputy presidents, but for officers of 
State, to revise and correct the body of Laws, to hold Committees for wholesome 
advice, and to put down that pestilent Custom of long adjournments lately crept 
in among us by enacting severe penal laws against those who presume to hold 
sham Clubs or Illegal Committees. If these expedients are not Speedily taken, 
this here Club will soon be at an End and this, probably, may be the last anniver- 
sary we shall see. Whereas, if proper care be taken, before it k too late, we may 
yet see many a Joyful Return of this day of Rejoicing, may often with pleasure 
behold our noble president exalted in his chair, smiling upon his club, which calls 
to my mind the folkMviiag pdetical pwmSfe. 

The brazen roof. Inlaid with Sparkling gold. 

With Carved Iv'ry & with amber pure. 

With shining silver, such the seat of Jove, 

Such the Star Chamber, where th' Immortals meet. 

Then may we often hear the poet Laureat repeating his elegant odes, the Chief 
musician warbling his dulcisonorous notes, Signior Lardini drawing Charming 
sounds from Cat guts with nimble fingers & skillful bow, and your poor orator 
perorating his anniversary Speeches while nothing but peace, harmony, mirth 
and Jollity prevails among us, which, ought to be the wish of every longstanding 
member of this here Club, as much as it is of 

Your humble Servant 
The Orator 

The orator having finished this oration, neither the president nor the Club 
seemed pleased with it not withstanding the fine flouri^ at the close, which 
shows how little men care to be told of their faults. The orator was in none of the 
best of humors at the delivering of this oration, and was resolved, since he found 
he could not advance himself by flattery, and dissimulation, which he had tried 
for a great while, to speak the naked Truth for the future. 

The Poet Laureat was then called upon to recite the ode, which at this time 
had not been set to music, snd, he rising up his head adorned with a chaplet of 
Lemmon leaves, instead of bays, recited in his place, with a Clear voice as 
follows: 

ANNIVERSARY ODE 
For the ancient and honorable Tuesday Club, in the year 1754, Humbly 



The Chronicle as Satire 



147 



Inscribed to the Honorable Nasifer Jole Esqr., President, and the Longstanding 
members of the Said Club by Their most humble Servant 

The Club's Poet Laureat 

Air 

Mighty Jole, we sing again 
Raise, 0 Raise the Joyful Strain 
Laughing muse, Resume the Lay, 
To Jole, and to the Joyful Day. 

Chorus 

Sackbuts, Cymbals. Timbrels, lutes 
Bangeos, dulcimers and flutes 
Bagpipe drones with snuffling bellows. 
Viols, violins, violoncellos 
Pipes and Tabors, kettle drums, 
Trumpets shtiH and dfeep hum strums, 
Harpsicord and Hauboys Sharp, 
Irish, Welsh and Jewish harp. 
Grave hybernian Clarshoo 
Cor de Chace, Guitarre also 
Join in general concert. Join, 
with your voice & his and mine. 
Till the arched Skies rebound, 
with the exhiliarating sound. 

Air 

Tis Jole, tis Jole demands our annual praise 

For Jole I sing, for Jole I wear these bays, 
Long live and prosper Jole the Great, 
May he, the favorite of fate, 
Still on his Club benignly Shine 
and rule with wise Judicious head 

From that exalted place. 

May his most gracious face 
On our Longstanding member shed, 

its Influence divine. 

Grand Chorus 

Ye members all Salute the Bowl 

Drink health long life and peace to Jole. 

To Jole, wlio other presidents exceed. 

In bold exploits & in the ruling art. 

As much as sturdy oaks do dwarfling weeds. 

Or awful thunder does a rousing fart. 

And when you've put the Goblet round, 

Sound again the music, sound 



148 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



wide, dilate eadt warbliMg throat 
While Eccho shall repeat each note, 
and thro' the wide expanded skie 
The praise of mig^hty Jote shall flie 

and all th' aerial powers, 

that crowd ambrosial bowers. 
The Zylphs, the Gnomes & Zephyrs sweet 
Their music Join great Jole to greet, 
and, charm'd with our Terrestrial lay. 
Descend to hail great Jole & this propitious day. 

The poet Laureat having recited thi* ode with applause was ordered to return 
thanks to the orator for his anniversary oration, which he did in the following 
words: 

Mr. Orator, Sir, 

By the order of his honor the President & the Club — 

President: By my order Sir! No I'd have you and the Club to know I gave no 
order to return thanks for any such stuff [this the President said see sawing and 
Rolling his handkerchef on his knee].^"* 

Poet: I beg your honors pardon. — well — Mr. Orator Sir, — by the order of the 
Club, I return you thanks for the Elegant anniversary speech you have delivered 
upon this occasion. 

Then the orator being ordered to return thanks to the poet laureat for his 
anniversary ode, did it in the following words: 

Mr. Poet Laureat, Sir, 

The orders of his honor the Pres. — hohl — I mean Sir, the orders of the Club, 
which I shall always be ready to obey and which I greatly Respect and honor, are, 
that I should give you thanks, for them and in their name, for your elegant 
anniversary ode Just now recited. Sir, I wish that my abilities were equivalent to 
your sublime genius, that I might be qualified to return you such thanks as would 
be adequate to your extraordinary merit, but since I cannot thank you in such 
strains as I would, I must beg of you to accept of my thanks for the club in such a 
plain stile as my genius can reach. 

Thus did the Two Clubical Geniuses compliment, or (as some call it) Scratch 
one another, and, the Club seemed to be of opinion, that this short extempore 
speech of the orators, was much better than his long studied anniversary oration. 



28. The brackets are in the original. 



Building a Frontier Ironworks: 
Problems of Transport and Supply, 
1837-1840 

KATHERINE A, HARVEY 



During the second quarter of the nineteenth century, following the 
discovery of vast deposits of coal and promising veins of iron ore in the Ap- 
palachians, speculators began to buy tracts of mineral lands in western Penn- 
sylvania, western Maryland, and what is now eastern West Virginia. Much 
of this land came into the hands of newly-created corporations with capital 
sufficient to promote mining and manufacturing operations far in advance of 
existing family ironworks or farmers' coal diggings. 

The inaccessibility of the raw materials led most entrepreneurs to wait for the 
advent of railroads or canals before beginning to (iifrta^ tfe^ p^SpHi^. 
However, in a few instances, confident that adequate transportation would soon 
be available, corporate boards of directors voted to begin operations at once. 
Since much of Appalachia was almost as isolated in the 1830s as it had been in 
the immediate post-Revolutionary period, the engineers of pioneering companies 
had to contend with adverse conditions of transport and supply. 

This article proposes to set out in some detail the major logistical problems and 
the solutions of one frontier enterprise, the George's Creek Coal and Iron 
Company, incorporated by the Maryland legislature in 1836.' On its 11,000 acres 
southwest of Cumberland the company planned to build four blast furnaces with 
steam-powered blowing apparatus and hot blast, together with molding houses, a 
foundry, a steam hammer, puddling furnaces, and a rolling mill. ^ The fuel for the 
furnaces would be coke or raw coal rather than charcoal.^ 

In 1837 the company began building its No. 1 furnace.* The site chosen for the 
ironworks (now the town of Lonaconing) lay on George's Creek halfway down a 
narrow valley running between Frostburg, on the National Road, and Western- 
port, on the Potomac River. The region was almost unbroken forest with possibly 

Ms. Katherine A. Harvey lives in Silver Spring, Maryland. 

1. Md. Laws, Dec. Sess. 1835, Ch. 328. 

2. Allegany County, Md., land records, liber T, folios 298 and 327; George's Creek Coal and Iron 
Company, George's Creek Coal and Iron Co. (n.p., 1836), pp. 27-30. Hereafter referred to as GCC&I 
Co. Report, 1836. 

3. John H. Alexander, Report on the Manufacture of iron (Annapolis, 1840), p. ix. 

4. The particulars of its construction and of all the other activities involved in the establishment of a 
company town are related in a day-to-day journal kept by the various superintendents of the project. 
This privately -owned manuscript is presently being edited by the writer. It will be cited here as 
Journal. 

149 

Maryland Historical Magazine 
Vol. 70, No. 2, Summer 1975 



150 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



fgr~~ — ^ ^ 




Remains of the Lonaconing furnace, c. 1911. Maryland Geological Survey. 



a dozen houses scattered along the county road, a rough trail hardly wide enough 
for a wagon. After heavy snows or during spring floods this road was impassible; 
the creek could not be forded at high water.' It was an area whose inhabitants 
had learned to "make do" or do without, accepting their remoteness from the 
outside world as a fact of life. Baltimore, the nearest big city, was 150 miles away. 
Western Maryland's only link with the eastern seaboard was the National Road, 
a busy thoroughfare crowded with stagecoaches and freight wagons traveling 
between Baltimore and Wheeling. Neither the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad nor the 
Chesapeake and Ohio Canal, progressing snail-like since 1828, had as yet reached 
Cumberiaiid, gateway to the West but aevertheless a small courthouse town of 
limited population and resources. 

The distance from manufacturing centers and labor supplies made it impera- 
tive thai the company use to the fullest possible extent matwials from its own 
lands,* and that it induce neighboring farmers to contract for the hauling of these 
materials to the building sites. There was plenty of sandstone for the furnace 
stack, limestone for mortar, and clay for bricks, but the stone had to be quarried, 
the lime burned, and the clay molded and baked. Heavy stands of white pine, 
oak, maple, walnut, hickory, locust, ash, and poplar could furnish lumber for 



5. J. Thomas Scharf, History of Western Maryland, 2 vols. (Philadelphia, 1882), 2: 1499; and James 
W. Thomas and T. J. C. Williams, History of Allegany County, 2 vols, (n.p., 1923), 1: 536. 

6. GCC&I Co. Report, 1836, p. 22, points out the company's self-sufficiency in r»W material "for 
almost any manufacture." Furthermore, the furnace could be built with sandstone ""Cattied not one 
hundred yards" from its bed on tram roads constructed from the timber cleared from the quarry site. 



Building a Frontier Ironworks 



151 



mdvwtrial building, tram roads, and woftemwj's ho<iises,' but first the trees had 
to be felled and the logs dragged to the mill for sawing. 

The typical American blast furnace of the 1830s, burning charcoal, was seldom 
iii0M<«iM Aiftylie^ « kmim^^bMiy<9^ square. f4ltii»«€l-^ tke use of 

coke or coal, the furnAc* Wt Lonaconing, following English and Welsh examples, 
was to be fifty feet high, fifty feet square at the base, and twenty -five feet square 
at tl«e top.' The dutsid^ ctf im asg^t^^m» iMne« ^v«» no hmt of mgMi>«% 
interior construction. Supporting walls thick enough to withstand the heat and 
vibration of the blast surrounded the relatively small hollow interior in which the 
8*&«h;ihf process took plEBEie. At Ij0«a6€)««»g, 'fer "««aiitpie, the interiOT had a 
diameter of five and one-half feet at the top of the stack (where the outer walls 
were twenty-five feet across), and fourteen and one-half feet at the boshes, the 
widest part (where the outer walls were riawit ^f^ly ^evt wide.) 

Each face of this furnace was broken bv a brick arch sixteen feet wide. The 
archways, which penetrated deep into the walls, tapered to a width of six feet at 
their inner «nds. In the spaees oceiif^ied' by the arfeltways, masonry piers 
supported the upper part of the stack. The piers, made of large cut stones laid 
with mortar, were solidly built to take the weight of the walls. Cast-iron beams 
crosefeif the archways firei^fded additio««il »«|}¥)@rt. 

Above the arches and the iron beams, the furnace stack continued in the form 
of thick outer walls gradually tapering to the desired width at the top. At 
intervals metal bind^ retaforoed the vrMs tUti. hdped to counteract the 
expansion and contraction of the building materials with the heat of the blast. 
The binders, which were wrought iron rods or bars, went all the way through the 
outer walls frdtai side to side of the stack. Large cast-iron washers slipped over the 
rods covered the binder channels and the adjacent stonework. The rods 
protruding through the washers were bent into loops, and iron wedges thrust 
throufli the loops kept the binders in pmkAm. In some cates ends of the 
binders were threaded so that large iron nuts could be screwed on. Both methods 
of fastening the binders were used at Lonaconing. The iron beams, binders, and 
lK>)dfa8te had to come &om already established ironworks; all other materials for 
the stack were produced on the spot. 

Into the hearth and the supporting walls went blocks of stone weighing as much 
as 7,200 pounds apiece and measuring 6x4x2 feet. To bring stones to the 
furnace foundation from two quarries on the hill above it, the company built 
tram roads with oak rails cut 4x6 inches and laid on sleepers. The first of these 
roads, with a slope of 1:3, was ready when work on the furnace began, but the 
vehicles to be used on it had not been perfected. The size of the stones 
determined whether they should be moved down the rails on rollers or carried on 
sleds (stone boats) or in wheeled cars. The first ^d built by the cai^jenters and 
blacksmiths proved to be too heavy and too slow. One of lighter construction 
worked satisfactorily for a few hours before it broke away and was wrecked. In its 

7. Ibid., p. 21. 

8. Alexander, Report on the Manufacture of Iron, p. 92; and Frederick Overman, The Manufacture of 
Iron in all its Various Branches (Philadelphia, 1850), p. 175. For a detailed description of the 
construction of a blast furnace, see ibid., pp. 153-64. 



152 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



first hour of operation the third sled delivered five loads of twenty-one cubic feet 
each, and apparently continued successfully thereafter.' 

The wheeled cars were just as much of a problem. The first, top-heavy and too 
fast, went back to the shops to be made lower and to be fitted with a brake. In 
spite of the alterations, it broke loose and was damaged. Refitted, it broke again 
and was again repaired and put on the railroad, where it managed to deliver in an 
hoHT and a half six loads of twenty -seven mkm fmt {am cmbic yard) each at a 
cost of $.1875 per cubic yard. A windlass installed soon afterward provided 
assistance for the crew of six men needed for the railroad.'" 

The seeond quarry railroad was finished in October 1837, by which time a gang 
had begun the excavation for a self-acting inclined plane, 567 feet long, intended 
primarily to supply the furnace with coal, but to be used also for sending down 
building stone from the quarry near the coal mine." 

Delayed by occasional shortages of laborers, carts, and sawed lumber for rails, 
the plane was not finished until the end of March 1838 when trial loads of coal 
and stone were let down. The cars ran on two paiidld sets of tracks and were 
attached to a chain wound around a drum (eight feet long and with a diameter of 
six feet) located on the platform where the cars were loaded.'^ As a full car went 
down on one set of rails, its weight pulled up an empty car on the other. The 
chain, of half- inch iron with links 1 'h x 2 V2 inches on the inside, was bought in 
Baltimore from Captain W. Graham, who had imported it from England. The 
cost was $272.26.'' The bodies for the tram cars were made by the company 
carpenters and blacksmiths, and the wheels, axles, boxes, and bearings were cast 
by Ross Winans, a Baltimore founder and designer of cars and locomotives for the 
Baltimore & Ohio Railroad." 

From time to time cars ran off the track, either because of defects in their 
construction or because of the carelessness of the men, but on the whole the 
inclined plane worked well, supplying stones for the masons as fast as they could 
use them.'* 

Before completion of the second quarry railroad and the inclined plane, some of 
the large stones were rolled all the way down the hill to the furnace foundation. 
Many more were hauled by sleds along rough cart roads. How primitive these 
roads were is indicated by the time it took to build them — a matter of two or 
three days. Steep and slippery, they required frequent repair or even relocation 
after heavy rains or snowstorms. Local farmers furnished sleds, wagons, horses, 
oxen, and drivers for transporting stone and other building materials to the 

9. Journal, June 22, Aug. 21, 24, 25, 1837. 

10. Ibid., Aug. 21, 22, 24, 28, 29, 31, and Sept. 2, 1837. 

11. Ibid., Sept. 21, Oct. 12, 1837; and George's Creek Coal and Iron Company, untitled report of 
directors, 1839 (n.p., n.n., 1839), p. 6. Hereafter referred to as GCC&I Co. Report, 1839. 

12. Journal, Sept. 27, Oct. 19, Nov. 3, 1837; and Feb. 16, Mar. 26, 31, 1838. 

13. Ibid., Nov. 9, 10, 1837. See also W. Alexander to J. H. Alexander, Nov. 16, 1837, Alexander 
Papers, Md. Hist. Soc; and daybook entry Nov. 27, 1837, Welch and Alexander Record Books, Md. 
Hist. Soc. 

14. Journal, Mar. 28, 1838, and Jan. 2, 1839. See also Winans order book, Jan. 1839, and Winans 
journal entry Jan. 30, 1839, indicating that each set of four wheels, complete with sales, etc., cost 
about $19 (Winans Papers, Md. Hist. Soc). 

15. Journal, Apr. 4, 5, 6, 13, 18, 21, 1838. 



Building a Frontier Ironworks 



153 



furnace and other parts of the works. By contracting for such services the 
company was able to get along with a minimum of draft animals. As late as the 
end of 1838 it owned only ten horses and had only a single wagon to send to town 
f©r goods.'* Similarly, by depending on contrae*oi«s w4io would hire the men 
needed for constructing the various parts of the furnace complex, as well as the 
dwelling houses, store, church, sawmill, and other units which made up the 
village, the company was able to limit its own payroll to a few carpenters, 
blacksmiths, laborers, and eventually furnace hands and miners. 

The stone which company employees quarried and delivered to the furnace site 
passed into the hands of a contractor responsible for the masonry and brickwork 
of the stack. He brought his own masons and stonecutters from Pennsylvania, 
and as the work progressed, looked for others locally.'' 

All of the stone had to be dressed to sem« extent. Facing stones, corner stones, 
and arch stones required more attention than the rough trimming given to 
material for the supporting piers. HeartbstcMies required the greatest care of all. 
Trapezmdal in shape, they had to be cut with a great deal of precision so that 
they would fit into the several circular courses forming the inverted cone of the 
furnace interior below the boshes. To assure their fitting, the superintendent 
determined the dimensions of the stones and gave the carpenter directions for 
making a template to guide the stonecutters." 

For lifting blocks into place on the stack, the company carpenter rigged a 
wooden crane which worked for a few days before breaking while lifting a load of 
"less than 2 tons." Although considerably reinforced with wood, iron rings, and 
screw bolts, it broke again with a stone weighing 3,840 pounds. After further 
bracing by the carpenter and the blacksmith, the crane gave no more trouble for 
several months. The carpenter also installed windlasses as they were needed. 
However, even with the help of these rudimentary hoisting devices, it took ten 
men to place the huge bottom stone of the h«arth. The superintendent djd not 
risk using the crane to put the cast-iron supporting beams across the arches. 
Instead, a team of horses dragged the beams up the hill behind the furnace to a 
point from which the men could roll them onto the stack and maneuver them into 
position.^" Each of the four beams weighed more than 3,400 pounds.^' 

All of the mortar used for the furnace and other masonry was made with 
limestone quarried and burned on the premises. Here, as in many other 
operations, the most efficient way of burning the lime was determined by 
experimentation. From notes in the journal entry of November 11, 1837, we know 

16. Ibid., Aug. 23, 24, 26, 28, Sept. 1, 6, 13, Oct. 18, Nov. 3, 4, 13, 28, 30, Dec. 8, 1837; and Dec. 21, 
1838. 

17. Ibid., Oct. 27, Nov. 1, 6, 1837; and Jan. 9, Mar. 19, Apr. 5. 7, 10, 1838. 

18. Ibid., Sept. 11, 1837. The parallel sides were almost thirty-eight inches wide at the back and a 
little over thirteen inches wide at the front. The slanting sides were thirty-two and a half inches long, 
and the stones were roughly two feet thick. 

19. Ibid., Aug. 23, 24, 25. 30, Sept. 1, 4, 1837. 

20. Ibid., Aug. 26, 29, Sept. 5, 6, 7, 11, 12, 28, 29, Nov. 24, 1837. On July 31, 1838, the crane broke 
while delivering stone for the hearth. 

21. Ibid., June 26, 1837. The Journal does not indicate where the beams were manufactured. An 
inquiry was made concerning the cost of carrying them from Winchester, Virginia, to Lonaconing (W. 
Alexander to Isaac Paul, Aug. 1, 1837, Letter Book 1, Welch and Alexander Record Books). 



154 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



that the first three limekilns at Lonaconing followed the design of Cyprien-Pros- 
per Brard, a French mineralogist, as described in the Dictionnaire de I'Industrie 
by Henry-Frangois Gaultier de Claubry." Alternate layers of coal and limestone 
built up to the desired height were enclosed in an outer shell of sandstone blocks 
or bricks laid about a hand's breadth apart without the use of any mortar. The 
illustration of Brard's kiln shows five layers of coal and four of limestone. The 
bottom layer was of coal with fagots and larger wood piled on top for kindling. 
The top layer was of fine coal covered with ashes, cinders, or earth to prevent loss 
of heat. The kiln was lighted at the bottom and allowed to burn until the stone 
had crumbled to powder — about thirty hours. Eighteen hours of cooling were 
necessary before the lime could be drawn out. 

Because these first three kilns turned out poorly, the masons at the furnace ran 
out of mortar, and the superintendent thereupon ordered the building of a clamp 
for burning limestone." A clamp, unlike a kiln, did not have containing walls, 
the lime burner heaping his materials in a rough mound in the open. A sketch in 
the journal entry for August 25, 1837, shows that the bottom coal in the clamp 
was arranged in four rows approximately six feet long, eighteai inches wide, six 
inches high, and a foot apart. The largest chunks of limestone applied carefully 
over the coal bridged the gaps between the rows and allowed the circulation of air 
from below. Additional alternate layers of coal and limestone completed 
construction of a pyramid about four and one-half feet high. This particular 
clamp contained approximately eighty-one cubic feet of raw materials. Fires 
kindled in the spaces at the bottom of the pyramid ignited the coal, and the 
clamp burned until the limestone was reduced to a fine powder. The journal 
notes the construction of twenty-eight limekilns and clamps between August 
1837 and April 1839. 

The blast furnace arches, two hot air furnaces, the furnace for the steam 
boilers, as well as the various chimney stacks involved, called for an enormous 
number of bricks, which could be obtained most economically by manufacturing 
them on site. Consequently, in late August 1837 a brickmaker summoned from 
Baltimore arrived with a gang of journeymen and began molding bricks from clay 
dug and tempered by the company's laborers. Working under a shed and on 
tables made by the company's carpenters (who also made the brick molds), the 
contractor and his hands filled and fired their first kiln of bricks on September 

21. Fuel for the kiln was provided by the company's woodchoppers. At least four 
kilns, one containing 14,000 bricks, were burned before cold weather set in. 
Although the terms of this first contract are not known, the contractor probably 
received $4.25 per thousand, the amount he was paid in 1839.^^ His offer to stay 
and make bricks through the winter and spring of 1837-38 at the rate of $4.50 per 
thousand was refused as too high. After the brickmakers were sent home on 

22. Dictionnaire de I'Industrie, Manufactiere, Commerciale et Agricole, 10 vols. (Paris, 1836-1841), 
5: 442-56. For another contemporary description of limekilns see J. T. Ducatel, "Treatise on 
Lime-burning," in Annual Report of the Geologist of Maryland 1838 (n.p., n.d.), pp. 25-33. See also 
Charles Tomlinson, ed.. Cyclopedia of Useful Arts & Manufactures, 2 vols. (London and New York, 
1854), 2: 294-95; and Eli Bowen, Off-hand Sketches (Philadelphia, 1854), p. 46. 

23. Journal, Aug. 21, 22, 25, 1837. See also Nov. 11, 1837. 

24. Ibid., Aug. 23, 25, 31, Sept. 9, 14, 18, 21, Oct. 14, 1837; July 22, 1839. 



Building a Frontier Ironworks 



155 




Type of limekiln fiist used at LoiMMOMtf. ^wm J^ietio^mmre I'bt^mtrit 



November 6, the company bought, or rather borrowed, bricks from a neighboring 
farmer, promising to replace them the following summer when they were 
nefeded.** 

In May 1838 the company advertised in the Baltimore A /nen'can and in several 
Pennsylvania newspapers for a brickmaker who would contract to make a half 
million or a ffiiMloli bricks, going down to Lonaconing with two working crews and 
guaranteeing to deliver forty or fifty thousand bricks ready for use within a 
month of the contract date.^^ The contractor who had made bricks in 1837 
returned in June 1838, presumably to work as before with considerable he^^ ffoin 
company employees. However, after finishing his first kiln, he was given a new 
contract at $4.50 per thousand, but he was required to dig and temper his own 
cliay, pfo¥!de*hiig own fii%wood (exempt that already cut), 4ild deliver the bricks 
wherever needed. The journal contains no detail on the 1838 brick production, 
merely noting the date on which the contractor finished his last kiln and left with 
his men. The same contractor returned in 1839. Between the end of January and 
the end of July he produced 440,000 bricks, so it seems likely that his output for 
three seasons was in excess of one million.'" 

Ordinarily the briekmatefl' wmiM also have made the'flrebricks (an estimated 
10,000) needed for lining the furnace, and soon after he arrived in Lonaconing in 
the fall of 1837, the company had laborers pounding fireclay to be ground on a 
neighbor's gristmill. Preparation of the clay proved extraordinarily difficult. By 
November 2 only 230 bushels had been ground by the miller, who kept protesting 
that the material was too heavy for his stones and raised too much dust. Because 
of the impossibility of getting enough firebricks burned in time, the furnace was 
lined with sandstone. 

After the furnace went into blast in May 1839, the brickmaker began to 

25. Ibid., Nov. 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 1837. The company got at least 2,345 bricks from this source. 

26. Ibid., May 18, 1838; and Baltimore American, May 24, 1838. 

27. Journal, July 27, Oct. 20, 1838; Jan. 26, July 22, 1839. 

28. Ibid., Sept. 17, 20, 21, 23, Oct. 4, Nov. 2, 3, 1837; GCC&I Co. Report, 1839, p. 7; and W. Young to 
Samuel Swartwout, Aug. 14, 1838, in Benjamin Silliman, Extracts from a Report Made to the New 
fork miWof^^nd Coal & Irm (!^0my (Xondcn, 1838), p. 44. 



156 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



experiment with making firebrick so that relining, when necessary, could be done 
with the preferred material. By the end of July he had delivered 1,500 good 
firebricks, for which he charged $20 per thousand. Fireclay digging began again, 
and again grinding it at the gristmill was attempted. Finally, not wishing to ruin 
the millstones, the superintendent called the operation to a halt and ordered the 
making of rollers for pulverizii^ thexlay.^' Regrettably the account of firebrick 
making ends at this point. 

In addition to bricks, stone, and mortar, building an advanced type of iron 
furnace involved a large amount of machinery for providing the hot blast 
necessary when coke was used as the smelting fuel. For this purpose the George's 
Creek Coal and Iron Company ordered a steam engine, boilers, and blowing 
cylinder from the West Point Foundry Association machine shops in New York 
City.'" 

It was originally intended that all of this machinery, an estimated twenty tons, 
should be sent by ship from New York to Georgetown, the head of navigation on 
the Potomac River and the eastern terminal of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal. 
At Georgetown the machinery would be unloaded and put on canal boats for 
carriage to Williamsport, a shipping and transfer point west of Harpers Ferry and 
about nine miles directly south of Hagerstown, Maryland.'' In 1837 the canal 
boat charge for carrying castings and other manufactured iron between George- 
town and Williamsport was $3.50 per ton.'^ 

As it happened, only part of the company's order could be shipped in time to 
arrive in Maryland before ice closed the canal. The five boilers, each twenty-four 
feet long and thirty-six inches in diameter, reached Williamsport on October 24, 
1837," and arrangements were made at Lonaconing to have one of the 
neighboring farmers go to fetch them. Because of a shortage of wagons in the 
vicinity, it took him about ten days to assemble his crews and start on the 
ninety-mile trip to Williamsport.'* The journey there and back required eleven 
days. 

The steam engine itself (knocked down) reached Baltimore late in November 
1837. The company's forwarding agent, William Alexander (a commission 
merchant who was a stockholder in the George's Creek Coal and Iron Company 
and brother of its president), had the various parts brought by dray to his 
establishment near the wharves. H^e he employed laborers to pack and load the 
machinery for transport to Lonaconkig,'* where the superintendent noted the 
arrival of twelve wagons with "steam &ngine apparatus," "machinery stuff," and 

29. Journal, June 28, July 22, Sept. 14, 20, Oct. 3, 29, 1839. 

30. Journal entries refer to correspondence with William Kemble, younger brother of the Associa- 
tion's president, concerning delivery of the engine. 

31. J. H. Alexander to J. P. Ingle, Aug. 7, 1837, Chesapeake and Ohio Can«l Papers, National 
Archives. 

32. Advertisements of William HoUiday and Joseph HoUman, Hagerstown Mail, Mar. 10, 1837. 

33. Journal, Nov. 8, 1837. Dimensions of the boilers are given in Walter R. Johnson, Notes on the Use 
of Anthracite in the Manufacture of Iron (Boston, 1841), p. 8n. 

34. Journal, Nov. 9, 16, 22, 1837. The distance was computed from point to point on the stage route as 
given in Mitchell's Traveller's Guide Through the United States (Philadelphia, 1836). 

35. See daybook entries, Nov. 28-Dec. 23, 1837, Welch and Alexander Record Books, The entries 
include drayage charges, laborers' wages, costs of wood and rope for packing, and the cost of weighing. 



r 



Building a Frontier Ironworks 157 

"machinery" between December 8, 1837, and February 25, 1838. One of the 
IfWStst components of the blast machinery was the blowing cylinder, eight feet 
l«iig «pd five feet in diameter. The wagoner with this load spent two days, even 
with the help of three extra men and eight a'aditiottal horses, in getting the 
<^linder down the nine mflss of muddy road between the turnpike and the 
ironworks. In a rare mishap one of the last wagons slipped off a snow-covered road 
(with the morning temperature fourteen degrees below zero!), but did not upset. 
It was necessary to unload and bring the machinery down the remaining five 
miles on sleds. ^* 

The final lot of machinery from New York, about three and a half tons, reached 
Baltimore on August 13, 1838." This time, to secure freight rates lower than 
those quoted by wagoners, the company's agent forwarded the shipment part way 
by railroad — from Baltimore to Harpers Ferry on the Baltimore & Ohio, and from 
Harpers Ferry to Winchester, Virginia, on the Winchester and Potomac. From 
Winchester a forwarding agent transported the machinery by wagon to 
Lonaconing." 

The machinery purchased from the West Point Foundry was only a part of the 
blast system. Its function was to force cold air through cast-iron pipes to two 
hot-air furnaces where it woiald b« heated iri a nest of pipes before passing 
through the tuyeres into the biaet furnace. Most of these pipes and the iT&m 
fixtures for the hot air furnaces ware oidered from three foundries in Baltimore: 
Messrs. J. Barker & Sons, Ellicott's Iron Works, and Ross WinAns.*' These 
manufacturers delivered their castings to the company's agent for forwarding. 
For this service he charged his principal a commission of eight cents per 100 
pounds. In November 1837 he sent on three wagons with pipes from Barkers' 
works. Additional orders from Barker in March 1838 amounted to more than 
1,800 pounds. After July 1838 most heavy materials went by the Winchester route 
outlined above. A typical shipment from Winans via this route included: "1 iron 
branch & 1 bonnet, 633 lbs.; 12 boxes & 12 bearings & 4 axles & wheels, 370 lbs.; 4 
furnace doors & 4 pes frame, 1,319 lbs."*° The branch, bonnet, furnace doors, 
and frames, of course, were for the hot blast system; the remainder of the ofder 
w^ railroad material. For installing the blast pipes, it was necessary to obtain 
also from Winans 700 pounds of iron borings to be used in making cement for 
the joints.*' 

When all the blast machinery was in place, the permanent water supply for the 
boilers was set up. Some water was brought from a stream flowing out of the coal 

36. Journal, Jan. 2, 3, 4, Feb. 25, 26, 1838. 

37. W. Alexander to J. H. Alexander, Aug. 14, 1838, Alexander Papers. 

38. The rationrie tor ming fhis route is set out in W. Alwcander to Robert Graham, July 7 and 26, 
1838, Letter Book 1, Welch and Alexander Record BocAs. 

39. Journal, Oct. 30, 1837; July 21, Aug. 31, 1838. 

40. Daybook, Mar. 16, 23, Aug. 13, 1838, Welch and Alexander Recwd Books; Journal, Nov. 13, 15, 
1837. 

41. Journal, July 26, 1838; and Order Book, Sept. 24, 1838, Winans Papers. The borings cost 5 cents 
per pound at the foundry. One formula for the cement was: 5 parts iron borings, 1 part fine clay, 
moistened by vinegar. An alternative formula was: 60 parts borings, 1 part sal ammonia, 6 parts clay, 
the whole moistened by water (Frederick Overman, Treatise on Metallurgy, 6th ed. [New York, 1882], 
p. 420). 



158 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



niin« on the hill above the furnace. More water came into a covered reservoir 
through wooden pipes laid from the millrace dam, which was about 1,600 feet 
from the furnace. A nilometer in the cistern showed whether the water supply was 
keepirag tip with consmmptton.** 

When in blast the furnace &hm nftepired a steady flow of cold water to the 
tuyeres. Water for the tuyeres filtered before it entered log pipes laid from 
the millrace dam. The carpenter constructed a two-compartment filter bed 
eighteen feet square and eight feet high set on the bottom of the race just above 
the headgates. The upstream compartment contained a bed of sand and gravel 
eighteen inches thick. After filtration the wjrtCT flowed into the downstream 
compartment, which contained, and thus protected, the openings of the pipes. A 
farmer was hired to get logs of the proper size, and a contractor agreed to bore the 
pipes with a 1 '/2-inch auger (sent by wagon from Baltimore the preceding winter) 
at the rate of six cents a foot, with the company providing food and lodging for 
himself and his helper. The pipe was bored and laid by the first of May 1839, but 
had to be taken up again because the flow was inadequate. With obstructions 
removed, the pipes delivered fourteen gallons a minute." 

The activities so far described culminated in the charging of the furnace on 
May 9, 1839, and the first run-out of iron on May 17. In anticipation of these 
events, the company's miners and quarriers had for more than eighteen months 
been digging and stockpiling iron ore, coal, and limestone flux. The journal's first 
entry indicates that iron ore was already being dug. Within a month workmen 
began uncovering an outcrop of the principal coal vein,** and as we have seen, 
quarries had been opened to provide lime for mortar. 

The hill above the furnace contained at least nineteen veins of iron ore and ten 
beds of coal sandwiched in with layers of sandstone, slate, shale, and fireclay. 
Iron ore bands varied from a few inches to about a foot in thickness, and the coal 
deposits ranged from twelve inches to fourteen and one-half feet.*' On this hill 
the company opened five underground iron mines and one mine in the 
fourteen-and-one-half-foot coal bed.*' It also developed a number of open pit 
workings which did not require skilled miners. With a little supervision, laborers 
with picks, shovels, and wheelbarrows could remove the earth above a vein of iron 
ore and then take out the ore itself. 

Laborers were abundant, but the experienced miners needed underground 
were scarce.*' In the spring of 1838 the company set a recruiter to Pottsville, 
Pennsylvania, a coal and iron mining center, where he was moderately successful 
in finding men willing to go to Maryland. Two miners were seduced away from 



42. Journal, Oct. 27, Nov. 10, 21, 1838; Jan. 2, 1839; and GCC&I Co. Report, 1839, p. 7. By a 
calculation made in the journal Aug. 15, 1838, the coal mine stream would furnish 150 gallons an 
hour, 3/5 of the required supply. 

43. Ibid., Journal, Dec. 17, 1838; March 4, 5, 23, Apr. 29, May 1, 7, 8, 1839. This proved not to be 
enough, and the tuyeres burned out soon after the furnace went into blast {Ibid., May 27, 1839). 

44. Journal, Sept. 21, 1837. 

45. GCC&I Co. Report, 1836, plates 4-6, and pp. 12-15; and J. T. Ducatel, Annual Report of the 
Geologist of Maryland, 1840 (Annapolis, 1840), plate II. 

46. GCC&I Co. Report, 1839, pp. 6, 8. These were all adit level mines. 

47. Ibid., p. 6. 



Building a Frontier Ironworks 



159 



the Chesapeake and Ohio canal tunnel near Cumberland. By May 1 the 
underground miners numbered thirty-six. Throughout the rest of the year men 
continued to drift down from Pottsville. In addition the company brought in coal 
miners from WtAm, 'payiWf f i*^fi"«f "Ateii atiia' their families, but 
requiring reimbursement from the $1.50 daily wage offered. The twenty-eight 
Welsh colliers (including nine boys ten to sixteen years old) appear to have 
completed the •afBitksrgroHnd fierce.** 

The company furnished all tools for miners and quarrymen. It ordered shovels 
through its Baltimore agent about every two months throughout 1838, and at 
longer intervals during 1839. The coinp«i^*s Maefkshiit^s made and sharpened 
other tools, and the carpenters made wheelbarrows. Most of the iron for the 
blacksmiths was obtained from F. H. Oliphant, whose works near Uniontown, 
Pennsylvania, convenient to the National Road, wi^re about siidy miles from 
Lonaconing. If the order made up a full wagon load, Oliphant would deliver it, 
charging fifty cents per 100 pounds for freight. Part loads were dropped off at 
Frostburg and hauled from there by Greenes Creek cwHpany teams. Orders for 
blacksmith iron went also to King, Swope & Co. of Bloody Run (now Everett), 
and a Mr. Bowers, of Franklin County, Pennsylvania. Tool steel, on the other 
hand, had to come from Baltimere." 

At first the company obtained small amounts of blasting powder in Frostburg, 
but as its operations expanded, it ordered large quantities from Baltimore. The 
agent's records show that he shipped n^sut f ,-300 poiin<ls of gunpowder between 
March 1 and November 1, 1838." About a third of this was sent part way by rail 
over the Winchester route, and the rest traveled all the way by wagon. At the 
ironworks explosives were stored in a powder magazine built in the summer of 
1838." 

By blasting, cutting, and digging the miners burrowed into the side of the hill. 
Close on their heels cam« the men laying the tram roads for carrying the ore and 
coal to the pit mouth. Cart roads md tram roads connected the mines and 
quarries with the top-house yard, where furnace hands roasted the ore, coked 
the coal, and broke up the limestone. °* The ore and coal were processed in clamps 
similar to those used for burning lime.'* 



48. Journal, Mar. 5, 10, 12, 23, 24, April 19, Sept. 15, 24, 27, Dec. 26, 1838; passenger list of barque 
Tiberias, which arrived in Baltimore with the miners on Sept. 11, 1838 (National Archives). 

49. Letterbooks and daybooks, 1837 40, Welch and Alexander Record Books, passim; Journal, Aug. 
25, Sept. 15, 29, Oct. 22, 1837; and Jan. 4, Mar. 6, April 25, June 19, 26, and Dec. 21, 26, 1838. The 
company agent forwarded in one order 347 lbs. cast steel, 47 lbs. blistered steel, and 52 lbs. German 
steel (Daybook, May 30, 1838, Welch and Alexander Record Books). 

50. Journal, Aug. 28, 1837; W. Alexander to Isaac Paul, Aug. 13, Sept. 27, Oct. 6, 1838; and W. 
Alexander to Robert Graham, Oct. 27, 1838, Letter Book 1; Daybook, Mar. 7, May 8, 17, 23, and June 
16, 1838, Welch and Alexander Record Books. 

51. Journal, June 27 and 28, 1838. 

52. Ibid., Aug. 21, Sept. 27, Oct. 12, 19, 1837; Jan. 5, Mar. 30, May 11, 1838; and Jan. 7, 12, Feb. 21, 
Sept. 7, 1839. A tram road and a cart road built in 1839 connected two limestone quarries with the 
head of the inclined plane, described earlier. Both coal and limestone were sent from the top of the 
hill by this railroad {Ibid., Mar. 8, Apr. 19, June 4, 1839). 

53. Ibid., Sept. 18, 1837; Feb. 27, 1838; Jan. 12, Apr. 27, Oct. 23, 31, 1839. See J. H. Alexander, 
Report on the Manufacture of Iron, pp. 144-45 and 163 for descriptions of clamps for roasting ore and 
making coke, with specific reference to the methods used at Lonaconing. 



160 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



The 38 furnace hands and the 140 miners, above and below ground, constituted 
the major portion of the 220 persons employed at the ironworks during peak 
production.^* Workers and their families brought the village population to 700 in 
mid-1839. In a region "hitherto almost a wilderness," providing shelter and 
sustenance for this population was the responsibility of the employer. A number 
of boarding houses (referred to as "shantees") erected on the flat ground near the 
furnace accommodated the workmen earliest on the scene, including the masons 
building the stack and subsequently the brickmakers. Because of the severe 
winters in the mountains of western Maryland, these houses had to be of 
substantial construction. Some of the boarding houses were in fact lined with 
brick after their occupants complained of the cold.^^ 

Family men rented dwellings outside the boundaries of the mining estate while 
awaiting completion of the log cabins which the company began to provide in 
September 1837. Generally speaking, native residents of the area (whom the 
city-bred superintendent called "mountaineers") contracted to build the shells of 
the cabins, and the company carpenters put in the floors and did the interior 
finishing. Sometimes the company's horses hauled logs to the cabin sites; 
occasionally the mountaineer contractor received an extra $4 per cabin for 
hauling his own logs. The company furnished and delivered the plank for 
flooring. In all, eighty-two double (two-family) cabins were built, some on the hill 
above the furnace, some on the flat ground on both sides of George's Creek, and 
some on lota laid out a^mg what w*as to be the town's main street.^' 

Also on the main street was the company store, a two-story edifice thirty-five 
by ninety feet, with cellars below and an attic above. The second floor contained 
an apartment for the company chaplain and his family, as well as offices for the 
doctor and the engineers, the latter having bachelor quarters in the attic. Like 
other general stores of the period, the company emporium carried an astonishing 
amount and variety of goods. Its principal supplier was William Alexander, the 
company's Baltimore commission agent. Alexander's shipments contained much 
that would be expected — soap, candles, salt, sugar, molasses, salt fish, cheese, 
coffee, and tea; they contained in addition generous amounts of what might have 
been considered luxury items — chocolate, tobacco, oranges, lemons, currants, 
■ almonds, figs, and many barrels and bottles of wine, including champagne. The 
wagons from Baltimore also brought clothing, shoes, dry goods, hardware, 
crockery, tinware, cutlery, glassware, brooms, umbrellas, and even fiddles, 
flutes, and harp strings.'* 



54. Journal, Mar. 13, May 27, 1839; Alexander. Report on the Manufacture of Iron, p. 93. 

55. GCC&I Co. Report, 1839, p. 13. 

56. Scharf, Western Maryland, 2: 1500; Journal, Oct. 9, 13, 1837; and Feb. 3, Oct. 31, Dec. 12, 24, 
1838; GCC&I Co. Report, 1839, p. 6. 

57. Journal, Sept. 18, Oct. 11, 17, 1837; and Jan. 18, Mar. 13, 15, 21, April 3, 18, 21, 25, Aug. 27, 1838; 
testimony of Robert Graham in George's Creek Coal and Iran Company v. C. E. Detmold, Chancery 
Records No. 8284, Md. Hall of Records. 

58. Robt. Graham to Richard Wilson, Oct. 23, 1839, GCC&I Co. Letter Book, Md. Hist. Soc; 
Journal, Sept. 2, 12, 1839. 

59. In the autumn of 1839 the stock in the new building was valued at $10,000. About $1,200 had not 
yet been moved from the old store (Graham to Wilson, Oct. 23, 1839, GCC&I Co. Letter Book). The 
two Welch and Alexander letter books list the goods sent, and sometimes discuss their quality. 



Building a Frontier Ironworks 



161 



The most conspicuous omissions from the Alexander shipments were flour and 
cured meats. Flour could be procured closer at hand and more cheaply from 
Uniontown, Pennsylvania, and Moorfield, Virginia. Hams came from Moorfield; 
bacon, from Wheeling. Eventually the company had to build a smokehouse 
because of "the precarious condition of about 12000 lbs. of Bacon now hanging in 
the cellar of the new store and in which the worms already appear in numbers."*" 

Fresh meat arrived on the hoof. The butcher periodically crossed into Virginia 
to bargain with farmers whose principal business was the grazing and stall 
feeding of livestock for eastern markets." Along the South Branch of the 
Potomac and along the Cheat River, he purchased cattle and sheep and drove 
them back to Lonaconing, where he had a slaughter yard.*^ 

The number of animals he brou^t back at any one time depended upon his 
instructions. The journal records his return with as few as four and as many as 
twelve beeves, which he paid for with money advanced by the company. On one 
trip he also arranged that twenty head which he bought would be fed by the 
farmer for an additional six weeks and would be paid for at the rate of $43 per 
head when taken away. We have no report of the weight of these cattle. Another 
drover from Virginia charged $65 apiece for steers averaging 675 pounds. Meat 
was offered for sale not at the store but in a separate market house.'' 

Whether as insignificant as the market house or as imposing as the store, every 
unit of frame construction in the village or at the furnace complex, as well as 
every foot of rail laid down, and every tram car built, put a strain on the 
chronically short supply of sawed lumber. Frustrating delays occurred because of 
the shortage of seasoned lumber and plank.** The several small sawmills in the 
vicinity, including one owned by the company, did not have the capacity to meet 
large-scale demands, and in any event were frequently stopped for as much as 
a week or more because of low water or becatise they were frozen up.*° 

During 1837 and 1838 the company had saw logs hauled to its own mill and got 
whatever small quantities of lumber it could from its neighbors. It also sent 
wagoners to Froslburg and Westemport to bring back dozens of loads of plank, 
which was dried in a newly-built kiln.^" The scarcity of lumber led to a decision in 
the spring of 1838 to contract for the erection of "a very large Saw-mill" and for 



conveying the impression that wages at Lonaconing were sufficient to allow the purchase of more than 

mere necessities. 

60. For Uniontown transactions see Journal, Jan. 15, 18.39, and Robt. Graham toRobt. Boyd, Oct. 14, 
1839, GCC&I Co. Letter Book; for Moorfield transactions, see Journal Sept. 19, 20, 1838, and Graham 
to John Hopewell, Sept. 21, Oct. 5, 14, Nov. 4, 9, 1839, Letter Book; Journal, Apr. 10, July 11, 1838, 
Sept. 13, 1839. 

61. For an interesting account of the early nineteenth-centurj' economy of this section of what is now 
West Virginia, see Otis K. Rice, The Allegheny Frontier (Lexington, 1970), Ch. 13. 

62. Journal, Jan. 14, Feb. 4, 1839. 

63. Ibid., Jan. 3, 12, Feb. 4, 8, 16, Mar. 23, Apr. 8, 18.39. One assumes that a market house would not 
have been built solely for this purpose, and that it also would have contained stalls for the sale of 
fruits, vegetables, poultry, eggs, and dairy products by farmers in the vicinity. 

64. GCC&I Co. Report, 1839, p. 6; and Journal, passim. 

65. The company acquired this small mill in purchasing land south of its original tract. One close 
neighbor to the north and another to the south also had mills along George's Creek (Journal, Aug. 24, 
Sept. 15, Dec. 12, 15, 17, 1837; Jan. 25, Feb. 19, 1838). 

66. Ibid., Aug. 24, Sept. 22, 23, 26, 29, Oct. 4, Dec. 17, 1837; and Feb. 7, 14, July 5, 1838. 



162 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



the building of seven and a half miles of graded road to connect the new mill with 
white pine forests on the company's more remote lands.*'' 

With its new sawmill and several other large buildings under way early in 1839, 
the company began to do business with a steam sawmill in Selbysport, 
Maryland, which could offer at one time as much as 30,000 feet of kiln-dried 
plank delivered at the works. The proprietors of the steam sawmill, however, 
sometimes refused to deliver, and when the iron compmiy sent its own wagons, 
the round trip took nine days. Finding this source of supply unreliable because of 
inordinate delays followed by attempts to substitute inferior materials, the 
superintendent at Lonaconing transferred his patronage to two other dealers who 
offered to supply lumber in large quantities.^* Unfortunately, the second of these, 
like his competitor at the steam sawmill, frequently sent along "green rough 
stuff*' iiKtead of the kiln-dried plank specified in his contract. Furthermore, he 
dragged out his deliveries far beyond the time when the lumber was needed. 

By the end of November 1839 the company was operating its own new mill, 
which had a capacity of 2Cr,C^ feet a day. Equipped also with shingle and lath 
machines, it was able not only to satisfy the company's various needs, but also to 
produce a surplus for sale.'" 

It is ironic that in the midst of great forests the company so often found itself 
out of lumber. In contrast, other building materials coming from a considerable 
distance could be obtained promptly and in the quantities ordered. The steady 
supply of nails is a good example. For at least the first nine months of 
construction, the superintendent ordered nails through William Alexander in 
Baltimore, paying freight for 150 miles and getting delivery at the works. Later 
orders for nails went to F. H. Oliphant at Uniontown, Pennsylvania, and David 
Agnew at Wheeling, Virginia, who provided transport only as far as Frostburg." 

Probably one of the most interesting orders for building material was for 10,000 
square feet of zinc for the engine house and molding house roofs, and its handling 
demonstrates how expeditiously both supplier and forwarder acted. On Septem- 
ber 5, 1838, the superintendent at Lonaconing wrote to Baltimore, ordering the 
zinc. On September 22 it was put on board a Baltimore & Ohio train on the first 
stage of the trip to Lonaconing via Winchester. The total of 10,200 pounds was 
rolled and packed in casks, each of which had a shipping weight of about 1,135 
pounds.'"' 

67. GCC&I Co. Report, 1839, p. 7. 

m. Jottrnal, Jan. 7, 16, Mar. 14, 23, Apr. 4, 21, 25, 30, June 11, 1839. 

69. Robt. Graham to G. W. Bedford, Nov. 19, 1839, GCC&I Co. Letter Book; and Journal, June 11, 
July 29, 18^; aod Jan. 30, 1840. 

70. GCC&I Co. Report, 1839, p. 7; Robt. Graham to John H. Clarke, Feb. 11, 1840, GCC&I Co. Letter 
Book. 

71. Daybook, Dec. 20, 21, 1837, and May 23, 30, 1838, Welch and Alexander Record Books. A typical 
Olipfaaot 'Order was one for twenty-twe k^ c€ various sizes of nails (Graham to Oliphant, Nov. 6, 
1839, GCC&I Co. Letter Boc4). Similarly, a typical order to A^ew called for ddivM-y of ten kegs of 
nails (Graham to Agnew, Sept. 21, 1839, ibid). 

72. W. Alexander to Isaac Pa«U, Sept. 22, 24, 1838, Lett^ Book 1, 'Welch and Alexander Itecord 
Books, and Welch and Alexander dayboofe. Sm^. 2^ 25, 1838» The transfer ag^t at Wincheeter was 
advised that if necessary he might employ a e«op^ to ieinf»ce Ae casks, but that he should be 
careful to see that no nails were driven in "»o as to enter or injure the zinc" (Alexander to Paul, Sept. 
22, 1838). 



Building a Frontier Ironworks 



163 



Delivery of zinc, nails, iron castings, and the like (and, of course, store goods) 
depended upon the availability of wagons, the willingness of wagoners to leave 
the hard-surfaced turnpike and essay the nine miles from Frostburg to Lonacon- 
ing, and the agreement between company agent and wagoner on the rate to be 
chargpd. Until the spring of 1838 William Alexander seems to have had no 
diffiiculty in arranging tot ttansport, but then he began to report trouble in 
finding a wagoner "disposed to go to your place." It was soon after this that he 
began forwarding by the Winchester route. During most of 1838 and 1839 he sent 
at least one load a week, mentioning from time to time that he had bargained for 
hauling prices of anywhere from $1.50 to $2.50 per hundred pounds. Goods 
traveling all the way by wagon from Baltimore reached Lonaconing in nine 
days." The trip via Winchester apparently required the same amount of time.'* 
However, if the emergency were great, small packages could be sent by mail 
coach, reaching Frostburg the next day. For example, screw taps urgently needed 
for threading the ends of the furnace binders were carried by stage at a cost of 
$4." 

When one examines the company's journal and letter book and the records of 
its Baltimore agent, noting the amount of correspondence and the numbers of 
orders, it is obvious that the progress of the inmwoAs depended to a great extent 
on the efficiency of the postal service. At the company's behest a post office was 
established at Lonaconing in Octobjer 1837. Not surprisingly, the first two 
postmasters were company employees." Another company employee carried 
daily mail to and from Frostburg except on those occasions when the road was 
blocked by snowdrifts or high water. His contract with the Post Office 
Department brought him $400 a year." 

To an observer in the 1970s it appears that mail in the 1830s moved with 
remarkable celerity. Letters traveling by regular mail in either direction between 
Lonaconing and Baltimore reached their addressees (not merely the post offices) 
two days after mailing." 

Without speedy communication it would have been difficult to deal with a 
peculiar problem in logistics arising from the unsettled state of the economy 
between 1837 and 1843. The company made all its major payments, including 
wages, by checks drawn on the Bank of Baltimore, maintaining an account in the 



73. Alexander to Dittmer, Feb. 24, 1838; Alexander to Tyson, May 5, 1838; Alexander to Paul, Oct. 4, 
1838; and Alexander to Graham, Oct. 27, 1838; Apr. 4, 1839, Letter Book 1, Welch and Alexander 

Record Books. 

74. This supposition is based on admittedly thin evidence. Alexander reports starting a heavy load on 
this route on Aug. 13, 1838, and the Journal of Aug. 22 states, "In the Evg. the waggons arrive." 

75. The screw taps were made by Charles C. Reinhardt, a Baltimore instrument maker, who charged 
$32. They were sent to Frostburg on the Stockton & Stokes stage (Daybook, Nov. 8, Dec. 15, 1837, 
Welch and Alexander Record Books). 

76. Journal, Oct. 10, 28, 30, 1837, and postal records, National Archives. Frederick Pauer, chief clerk, 
was postmaster from Oct. 5, 1837, to Dec. 3, 1838. He was succeeded by Robert Graham, business 
manager and later superintendent, who served until Apr. 27, 1849. 

77. As on Jan. 27, 1839, when the Journal records that he found snow seven feet deep in some places. 
Graham to Gardiner, Apr. 2, 1840, GCC&I Co. Letter Book. 

78. As indicated by notation of date received. In the spring of 1837 the Post Office Department 
invited proposals for carrying express mail between Baltimore and Cumberland in fourteen hours 
(Hagerstown Mail, Mar. 31, 1837). 



164 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



BiEtnfe of Cumberland so that employees might cash their checks there. It was 
necessary also to keep a stock of small bills and change at Lonaconing for the 
store and for various minor cash transactions. This was not easy during periods 
#h'eti the Nation's "bSnks suspended specie payments. In October 1837, for 
instance, the company's president, then at Lonaconing, was informed that he 
would receive a supply of money in $5 and $10 bank notes, but was cautioned: "In 
common with all other Banks we are compelled to make shifts to maintain our 
circulation. . . . The paper money if it can be avoided must not return to us in a 
mass." " 

Even after the resumption of specie payments in the spring of 1838, the Bank of 
Cumberland sometimes refused to supply notes and coin in response to the 
superintendent's request, resulting on one occasion in the business manager's 
having to borrow money &ota his workmen in order to pay off several miners who 
wished to leave. With some cooperation from another Cumberland bank, which 
would redeem its own notes, and with a supply of small bills sent from Virginia, 
affairs went on reasonably well until a second stoppage of specie payments and 
the onset of a serious depression in the fall of 1839.*° At the beginning of October 
there was on hand at Lonaconing $106 in specie and $975 in bank notes, enough 
to last for the rest of the month. Foreseeing that the company treasurer might 
have difficulty in sending change, the business manager suggested that he be 
supplied with scrip in denominations of 12, 14, 25, and 50 cents "on good paper 
with such Device as will tend to our security." " On this occasion he also 
indicated that he would like to have $1, $2, and .S3 notes of certain New York 
banks whose paper had already been circulated in western Maryland by the 
Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Company. 

The preceding two paragraphs reflect only peripherally the disarray of the 
London money market in the summer of 1839 and the depth of the subsequent 
depression in the United States. These events must be noted, because they had a 
direct bearing on the George's Creek Coal and Iron Company's ultimate problem 
in logistics — that of moving its product to seaboard. The entire Lonaconing 
ventute had been predicated on access to market via the Chesapeake and Ohio 
canal. 

When the iron company began work on its furnace, it was supposed that the 
canal would reach Cumberland late in 1839 or early in 1840.*' The company 
accordingly bought a tract of land on the Potomac, intending to build wharves 
and construct a basin which would in effect extend navigation from the end of the 
canal up river about a mile above Cumberland. During most of 1839 the 



79. Journal, Feb. 6, May 4, June 13, 1838; T. S. Alexander to J. H. Alexander, Oct. 22, 1837, 
Alexander Papers. 

80. Journal, Sept. 18, 25, Nov. 23, 24, 1838: Jan. 19, 21, 31, 1839. 

81. Graham to Wilson, Oct. 3, 14, 1839, GCC&I Co. Letter Book. The scrip of the Ohio canal 
comp«nies was suggested as a model. Presumably the scrip would cl/culate only in Lonaconing and 
the immediate vicinity (See Graham to Wilson, Nov. 18, 1839). 

82. GCC&I Co. Report, 1839, p. 10. 

83. C&O Canal Co., Ninth Annual Report (Washington, 1837), p. 11. This prediction was repeated in 
the annual report for 1838 (p. 7). 



Building a Frontier Ironworks 



165 




Mining iron ore. From Overman, Treatise on Metallurgy. 



company's corps of engineers was engaged in surveying three possible routes for a 
railroad connecting the works with the proposed shipping depot.'* 

M June 1839 the canal was still fifty miles from Cumberland, held up by a lack 
of money attributed to "embarrassments of the money market in England and 
the United States," and it seemed unlikely that it would be finished before the 
spring of 1842. In the meantime the George's Creek Coal and Iron Company was 
suffering embarrassments of its own. Its furnace was producing daily thirteen 
tons of top-quality pig iron which could not be sent eastward except at excessive 
expense." Wagoners charged 50 cents per hundred pounds (amounting to $10 per 
short ton) to take iron from Lonaconing to Baltimore.'* Pig iron could be carried 
on the canal from Williamsport to Georgetown for $2.50 a ton, or on canal and 
railroad from Williamsport to Baltimore for $4.35 a ton." 

Faced with a logistics problem over which it had no control, the company blew 
out the big furnace and began to use its stock of pigs for casting from its small 
cupola furnace various materials for its own use, particularly iron rails to be laid 
in the mines and on the tram roads connecting the different parts of the works. It 
postponed construction of its railroad to the proposed depot on the Potomac, and 
settled into a maintenance routine with reduced staff." 

The caretaker superintendent wrote in September of 1840, "When our 
Legislators please to give us a Canal, our business will resume." '" This was not to 
be precisely the case. After thirteen troubled years (whose history is outside the 
scope of this paper), business did indeed resume, but in coal, not iron. The 
company was able to survive a long period with virtually no income and then to 
rise swiftly to the role of a major producer in the increasingly important George's 



84. GCC&I Co. Report, 1839, pp. 7, 8, 10; and J. H. Alexander to J. P. Ingle, Sept. 15, 1838, C&O 
Canal Records, National Archives. 

m. C&O Canail Co.,.Eletiefah Arttmal RepoH (Washington, 1839), pp. 4, 9; and GCC&I Co. Report, 
1839, pp. 10, 12. There was in fact almost no market for the bontk Which the State of Maryland had 
issued to finance both the canal and the B&O Railroad (Message of Govearnor William Grason to the 
Md. Legislature, Jan. 2, 1840). The canal did not reach Cumberland until 18S0. 

86. Alexander to Grahftm, June 13, 1839, Letter Book 2, Welch and Alexander Record Books. 

87. Adv. in Hagerstovsm Mail, Max. 10, 1837. 

m. Journal, July 26, Aug. 3, and Wimket entry Aug. 14-21, 1839; GCC&I Co. Report, 1839, p. 10. The 
Journal and Lettw Book reflect incressing retrenchment after August 1839. 
89. Graham to Foisythe, Moore & Co., Sept. 24, 1840, GCC&I Co. Letter Book. 



166 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



Creek coal field. The original company carried on until 1910; its successor 
remained active until 1952. 

Although this article is directed mainly at throwing some light on the 
beginnings of an early nineteenth century ironworks, some general observations 
are prompted by the material. In the first place, it is interesting to note that the 
work at Lonaconiip was carried out under the direction of civilian engineers, a 
relatively il'^^^peed, although at the time army engineers were commonly 
assigned to examine and survey mineral lands and to lay out roads, bridges, 
canals, and railroads for private ent§5Bji§^,. Secondly, we have a concrete 
example of tHe ability of American technology of the period to adopt British 
techniques for the large-scale manufacture of iron. And thirdly, and perhaps 
most significantly, we can suggest that in this particular instance the technology 
was too advanced for the time and the location. Small charcoal furnaces 
prospered on the frontier because they produced for local use the fine quality iron 
demanded by blacksmiths and small foundries. Iron smelted with coke or raw 
bituminous coal was particularly suited for rails and heavy industrial castings, 
but unless their product could be delivered to market cheaply, ironworks using 
the new smelting process had no hope of survival. Ironworks in the more 
favorably situated anthracite regi<m, with its Rework of canals and railroads, 
had no such problem. 



William Norris 

and the Confederate Signal 

and Secret Service 

DAVE) WBMFRED GMU^Y 



Secrecy breeds anonymity. It is not surprising that the head of the 
Confederate Secret Service Bureau has eluded historians. Nor is the position of 
Commissioner of Prisoner Exchange likely to draw more than a footnote, particu- 
larly when elevation to that post took place in the last frantic days of the Confed- 
eracy. But the man who held both of these jobs, William Norris of Maryland, was 
also the Chief Signal Officer of the Confederate States Army — Chief of the Signal 
Bureau in Richmond — and, in that capacity, headed what has been termed the 
world's first formally organized military signal corps.' Even that distinction is 
virtually unknown. Other than a memorial window in a quiet wayside church, and 
his tombstone nearby, no monument to him stands. The official records of his 
wartime activities were, for the most part, destroyed; no diary survived; no 
autobiography was published. 

Anonymity would be bad enough, but even worse, perhaps, is the curse of 
obscurity. Two modern historians have confused Major William Norris with Dr. 
William S. Morris, president of the wartime Southern Telegraph Company.' 
Contemporaries cast doubt on the ultimate rank he attained in the Confederate 
service, that of colonel.^ His bureau's connection with espionage activities has 
remained obscure;* state historians seem to have been oblivious even of his 
existence.' And yet few, if any, of his rank bore, for nearly three years, the 
responsibilities, held the position of trust, and performed such unique and 
unsung service to their government as this Marylander to the Confederate States 
of America. 



Mr. David W. Gaddy lives in New Carrollton, Maryland. 

1. "The Confederate States Army Signal Corps was the first independent branch of professional 
signalmen in the military history of the world" (David J. Marshall, "The Confederate Army's Signal 
Corps," in The Story of the US Army Signal Corps, ed. by Max L. Marshall [New York, 1965 ], p. 63.) 

2. Edward Younger, ed., Inside the Confederate Government: 'The Diary of Robert Garlick Hill Kean 
(New York, 1957), pp. xxiv and Index, p. 238; Milton F. Perry, Infernal Machines: The Story of 
Confederate Submarine and Mine Warfare (Baton Rouge, 1965), p. 14. 

3. "His rank in the CS Army appears never to have been higher than that of major" is an editor's 
comment {Southern Historical Society Papers, 49 vols. [Richmond, Va., 1876-1944], 16: 93). 

4. Edwin C. Fishel, "f%e Myttiology of Civil War Melifence," Civil War History, 10 (December 

1964): 345-46. 

5. An exception is H. V. Canan, "Confederate Military Intelligence," Maryland Historical Magazine, 
59 (March 1964): 34-51. 

167 

Maryland Historical Magazine 
Vol. 70, No. 2, Summer 1975 



168 



Maryland Historical Magazine 




Col. William Norris, aftra: 18^. From original carte de uisite 
in pos^^oh ofHtn-i. JiilepMne Ntirrts Cotton. 

William Norris was born in Baltimore County on December 6, 1820, the son of 
Richard Norris, a hardware merchant and founder of Richard Norris & Company. 
He was a descendent of Henry Norris, who emigrated from England in 1680. His 
paternal grandfather, William Norris, had a drygoods store in Baltimore; his 
father^s brother, also named Wffliam (1^2-1867), gained fame as a builder bf 
locomotives." 

At the age of nineteen Norris graduated from Yale College (Class of 1840) and 
went to New Orleans, where he practiced law. News of the discovery of gold in 
California prompted him to outfit a ship and sail to San Francisco, where he 
arrived in March 1849 in the vanguard of the Forty-Niners.' Immediately upon 
his arrival, however, he was appointed Judge Advocate to the United States 
Pacific Squadron, forerunner of today's Pacific Fleet, then commanded by 
Thonaas ap Catesby Jones.' As judge advocate Norris participated in trials, 
courts-6f inquiry, and emirts-mafti&l during March, April, May, and October of 



6. Obituary, Baltimore Sun, December 30, 1896; Dictionary of American Biography, s.v. "Norris, 
William." William Norris is not to be confused with William H. Norris of Baltimore, a contemporary. 

7. Baltimore Sun, December 30, 1896. 

8. An interesting sketch of Jones and the period of his service in California is Gilbert Workman, 
"Forgotten Firebrand," United States Naval Institute Proceedings, 94(September 1968) -.79-87. 



William Norris 



169 



1849. In 1851 he sailed to Valparaiso, Chile, and there, on March 13, 1851, he was 
married in the Protestant Episcopal Chapel to Ellen Lyles Hdbson ^l^iH^, 
a daughter of a former United States consul.' 

Norris returned home with hii fefMe- 1» down at the faififly est«rte, 

Brookland, near Reisterstown northwest of Baltimore. There in 1852 his wife gave 
birth to their first child, a son, named Richard for his grandfather. During the next 
two years Norris tri«d repeatedly, «lth#u^ a^psrently without success, to secure 
compensation for his legal service to the Pacific Squadron. In 1858 he ventured 
into business as the president of the Baltimore Mechanical Bakery, an 
ultra-modern establishment on S©»th Howafdmear Pratt Street. According to a 
contemporary newspaper account, he took pride in personally escorting visitors 
through the facility, and explaining the mysteries of its equipment.'" 

On dviy 25, 1860, Morris attended tlse "twen^eth reunion of his Yale Class." 
There were other Forty-Niners among his clilismates, one of them William H. 
Tiffany, brother of the founder of Tiffany & C^pany. There were teachers, one 
of who^, Elias Hewitt WiMlatns (rf Crtetei, C6J»i#c*icut, taught in New Hamp- 
shire for a year after graduation, then went to Columbia, South Carolina, 
where he taught, studied law, and prepared young men for the university — one of 
his students was Wade Hampton. The ckMS would ^lit with the nation: 
John Devereux of North Carolina would serve as quartermaster of the state and a 
member of the state government under the Confederacy. Stuart W. Fisk of 
Natchez would die at Shiloh as colonel of a southern regiment, while Lewis 
Baldwin Parson would serve as chief of rail and river transportation for the Union 
Army, and win fame and promotion for moving the 20,000-man XXIII Corps from 
Eastport, Mississippi, to the Potomac (1,400 miles, in mid-winter) in eleven 
days. John Perkins of Natchez would be chairman of his state's secession 
convention in 1861, would serve as a member of the Confederate Congress, and 
would later join the Confederate expatriates in Mexico. One, Charles R. Ingersoll, 
would become governor of Connecticut.'^ One would give up his home, his 
fortune, and his state to aid the Confederacy, and serve as the head of its Signal 
and Secret Service Bureaus. 

During the winter of 1860-61, the strong, pro-Confederate sentiment of 
Baltimore was being manifested. Normally a blunt, outspoken man, William 
Norris made no effort to conceal his own feelings." As state after state in the 



9. William Norris Papers, Manuscript Collection, University of Virginia. Used by permission and 
hereinafter cited as Norris Papers, this previously unexploited collection comprises a small scrapbook 
of souvenirs kept by Norri^, as well as copies of some of his wartime and postwar correspondence, plus 
family co«resp@ndence. Its value lies in the uniqu«ii«BE of die information it reveifls, for the official 
recOTds at the Sign«d Biseau were destroyed by fire at the evacuittion of Richmond, and the bulk of 
NcHrris's pepe^ were loet in « postwar fire wtiich destroyed Isis home. 

10. Norris Papers. A copy of the newspaper clipping is in a scrapbook kept by Norris. 

11. YaleColl^, Jfi««one<riBecorrf(if«feeCteweof Id^OC'NewIlaven, 1870), p. 8. 

12. Ibid. Years after the war Norris wrote on a newspaper clipping about Ingersoll: "My old class 
mate »t Yrie & only Yankee I ever knew that had the instincts of a Gentleman . I knew very many 
though" (Narris Papers). 

13. Noriis's sentiments are reflected in a letter of March 17, 1861, from Louis T. Wigfall, in which the 
writer discusses pro-Confederate feelings in Baltimore (U.S. Ac^tant General's Office, Letters 
Received by the Confederate War Department [Washington, 1876], p. 1031). 



170 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



South left the Union, martial organizations in Baltimore and Washington were 
openly announcing their southern sympathies and holding demonstrations and 
drills, both to train and to attract new members. Three days after Virginia 
e«k»#d-ft»*o a military «dlfttMB»*rith the Confederacy, one such organization, the 
"Maryland Chasseurs," staged a special demonstration in Baltimore. One of its 
members received a notice that the meeting would be held at the armory at 3 
p.m. on April 27, 1861, "to iripam ifcS'p.*. mi iRwsdback wtth sabres at the 
Washington Monument." His invitati®W -differed, in that, at the bottom, in 
longhand, appeared these words: "Can y^>u act bring Mr. Norris with you?" He 
dtd. it wm m if the kifa»t V^tmMdmt^ pomA ttie question. When the time came, 
Norris took his family and went to Richmond. 

At the age of forty, with a wife in delicate health and five children ranging in 
age from one to nine, Norris left for Virginia, and there volunteered his services as 
a civilian aide on the staff of Brigadier General John Bankhead Magruder. On 
July 18, 1861, Magruder gave Norris authority to establish a system of signals on 
the Peninsula and across the James River. Drawing on his own nautical 
experience, and having witnessed a system in successful operation in Norfolk, 
Norris set up a network which employed flags and colored balls raised on poles. 
Magruder was favorably impressed with the accomplishment. He commended 
Norris to Secretary of War Walker in a letter of July 27, and he recommended 
that Norris be commissioned a captain. On that same date a similar appeal was 
addressed to R. E. Lee, Commander in Chief of the Virginia Forces, by 
Lieutenant Catesby ap Roger Jones, urging that Norris be appointed to 
Magruder's staff. 

Whether the delay was occasioned by normal red tape or other reasons, Norris 
continued to serve im a semi-official capacity. In November Magruder announced 
Norris's rank as captain and his position as signal officer of the Army of the 
Peninsula.'* Subs^uent correspondence with Richmond, however, found Ma- 
gruder varying his references to Norris as "Captain Norris, my signal officer," 
and "Mr. Norris, my signal officer." As late as May 3, 1862, he again called the 
attention of General Samuel Cooper to "the valuable services rendered by Mr. 
William Norris, of Baltimore, tiie signal officer in charge of the signal service of 
the Peninsula," suggesting that the rank of captain had not received confirmation 
as of that date." 



14. Norris Papers. 

15. Edward H. Cummins, "The Signal Corps in the Confederate States Army," Southern Historical 
Society Papers, 16: 93-107, reprinted in Benjamin LaBree, ed.. The Confederate Soldier in the Civil 
War (Louisville, 1895); J. Willard Brown, The Signal Corps, USA., in the War of the Rebellion 
(Boston, 1896), p. 205; Norris Papers. 

16. The War of the Rebellion: A Compendium of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate 
Armies (Washington, 1880-1901), ser. 1. 9: 44, 57. Hereinafter cited as OR. 

17. OR, ser. 1, 11: 410. Norris's service records are found in part in the Norris Papers and in the 
National Archives among the "Compiled Service Records of Confederate Soldiers in Organizations 
Raised Directly by the Confederate Government," available on microfilm as M-258, with reels 
116-121 covering the Signal Corps and the Independent Signal Corps. These Compiled Service 
Records are hereinafter cited as CSR, with the name of the individual concerned. 



William Norris 



171 



One incident of his service on the Peninsula made a deep impression in Norris 's 
mind, perhaps more so than the practical field ex-perience he received in helping 
to pioneer military signal communications. Tktt^vflK the historic battle between 
the irondad V^gmia and tJirSfifewlilid^aif'lBa'?*! 1!,'"^^; mih TOjWs aiM 
hundreds of others watched, lencountered and sank the wooden 

blockading ships Cumberland and €fe*|^ess in Hampton Roads. Virginia's 
captain. Franklin Buchanan, was wottftdid ite tljat ewtafement, and turned over 
his command to Norris's close friend, Lt. Catesby ap Roger Jones, CSN, who led 
Virginia against Monitor the next day.'* In later years Norris was to recall that 
day in an eyewitness account. 

In spite of the novelty of military signaling, Norris was not the only man in the 
Confederate Army at this time who bore the title "signal officer." But there was, 
as yet, wo officially organized signal cofps.** Th*#e wiis no precedent in ttie "old 
Army" for such an organization, although the Confederate leadership included 
men intimately familiar with proposals to create such a body. In the decade prior 
to the war, Albert James Myer (1828-1880), an aisistant surgeon in the U.S. 
Army, had turned an interest in sign language into a proposal for a practical 
system of military signaling which was to become familiarly known as "wig- 
wag," from the motions of the flag of torch employed. Senator Jefferson Davis 
and Colonel R. E. Lee were personally acquainted with the development of the 
system, and a young lieutenant who assisted Myer in his field trials, Edward 
POTter Alexander, subsequently resigned his commission and offered his services 
to the Confederacy. 

As Confederate president, Davis ordered Alexander to establish a signal 
corps. Before that could be accomplished, Alexander was ordered to set up a 
system in the field near Manassas Junction, Virj^inia, to serve General P. G. T. 
Beauregard. The crucial part Alexander's signals (and observations) played at 
Krst MfmassaS (July 1861) is a matter of record. Myer's system was given its first 
battlefirid test by his former assistant — on the opposing side — and proved its 
value. The inventor, appointed the first Signal Officer of the U.S. Army on July 
2, 1860, had rushed back to Washington "frctn service in the Southwest, but time 
and resources prevented him from fielding his system in support of his side in this 
first consequential clash of arms.^' 

The Myer system, with minor change, became the Confederate signal system. 
For speed, ease, mobility, and general efficiency, it obviously outweighed less 
flexible systems such as the one William Norris had employed on the Peninsula. 



18. Jones, whose name also bears the distinctive Welsh "ap," was the nephew of Thomas ap Catesby 
Jones, the Pacific commander of Norris's Forty-Niner days. Young Jones was serving in the Pacific 
during the same period, and his friendship with Norris may date from that time. 

19. Cummins, "Signal Corps;" W. N. M. Otey, "Organizing a Signal Corps," Confederate Veteran, 7 
(December 1899): 549-51, 8 (March 1900); 129-30, (August 1900); 342-43. 

20. OR, ser. 4, 1: 687. See also Edward Porter Alexander, Military Memoirs of a Confederate (New 
York, 1907), passim. A recent biography of Alexander is Maury Klein, Edward Porter Alexander 
(Athens, Ga., 1971), although it does not dwell heavily on his involvement in the Signal Corps. 

21. See George Raynor Thompson, "Civil War Signals," Military Affairs, 8 (Winter 1954); 188-201, 
and Paul J. Scheips, "Union Signal Communications: Innovation and Conflict," Civil War History 9 
(December 1963): 399-421. See also Alexander, Military Memoirs, p. 31. 



172 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



Men trained by Alexander in 1861 were subsequently assigned to duty with the 
departments and major armies in the field, and his brother, Captain James H. 
Alexander, prepared in 1862 a classified manual of instruction (the world's first 
signal corps manual, again scooping Myer, whose own manual was two years 
away).^^ But when the choice came of serving behind a desk as chief signal officer 
of the Confederacy or accepting field duty with the artillery, there was no 
question in Porter Alexander's mind: he declined the signal corps job.'' 

That choice came in the spring of 1862. The Confederate Congress on April 19 
authorized the establishment of a signal corps, and on May 29, General Order 
#40, Adjutant & Inspector General's Office, implemented the act.^"* Captain 
William Norris, one of the officers commissioned under that act, was ordered to 
duty at Richmond on July 31^* to serve as chief. On October 8, with the modest 
expansion of the corps, he was promoted to the one-star rank of major, the grade 
which he was to hold until the last weeks of the war. As the senior officer of the 
Confederate States Army Signal Corps, his pay was that of a major of 
infantry — $150 per month. Norris recalled the challenge of his job in a postwar 
letter to Jefferson Davis: 

Our mode of signalling was discovered just prior to the war and even Gen Alexander 
of Georgia, whom I succeeded and by whom I was instructed could give me no 
information as to the efficient organization of the corps. 

The track was entirely unbroken, & as yet, there were no lights of experience to 
illuminate it — I labored zealously to make the corps efficient, useful and respected 

26 

The act of April 19, 1862, placed a ceiling of twenty (ten officers and ten 
sergeants) on the number of men to comprise the corps. On September 27, 1862, 
Congress increased the size, allowing one major, ten first and ten second 
lieutenants, and twenty additional sergeants.^' The corps thus remained 
throughout the war a small (sixty -one men), select group, filling its vacancies 
from within its ranks on the basis of seniority. General Order #40 authorized a 
signal officer for the staff of each general or major general commanding a corps 
and each major general commanding a division. The signal officer in each 
division was to instruct the adjutant of each regiment in the signal system. 
Generals were urged to have their assistant adjutants general, aides-de-camp, or 
others of their staff so instructed. To assist the small cadre of "professional" 
signal corps officers and sergeants, privates were detailed to signal corps service 
as required, some remaining on detail throughout the war and even becoming 
sergeants. They were administered the oath required of all members of the signal 



22. Marshall, "Confederate Army's Signal Corps," p. 69; Brown, Signal Corps, U.SA., p. 206; OR, 
ser. 4, 2: 47; Albert J. Myer, A Manual of Signals: For the Use of Signal Officers in the Field 
(Washington, 1864). 

23. Alexander, Military Memoirs, p. 31. 

24. Confederate States Army, Special Orders 40, Adjutant & Inspector General's Office, hereinafter 
cited as A&IGO. See OR, ser. 4, 1: 1131-32. 

25. A&IGO Special Orders m/Vll. 

26. Norris Papers. 

27. A&IGO General Orders 93. See OR, ser. 4, 2: 198-99. 



William Norris 



173 



corps and instructed in its mysteries. When not actually engaged in signaling (or 
in what became at an early stage an alternative duty, observing the enemy), 
signal men were available as scouts or couriers, and some came to prefer service 
behind the enemy lines. It has been estimated that, in all, some 1,500 men were 
in the signal service in one csipacity or another."' 

This, then, was the far-flung activity which William Norris headed from the 
Signal Bureau in Richmond, a semiautonomous office placed under the Adjutant 
& Inspector General's Office in the War Department. Norris himself, in a 
"missions and functions" statement, provided an excellent capsule description of 
its activities: 

(1) management of the entire Signal Corps and cipher system of the Confederate States 
Army— therein is included also 

(a) manufacture and collection of all signal apparatus and stores; 

(b) manufacture, collection and distribution of all cipher apparatus; 

(2) management and supplying of secret lines of communication on the Potomac 

(3) translation of cipher messages received or sent by the War Department, heads of 
bureaus, or officers of the army 

(4) provide transp)ortation across the Potomac for agents, scouts and others peissing 
from and to Baltimore and Washington 

(5) observing and reporting all movements of the enemy on the Potomac 

(6) procuring ffles of the latest Nbrthem newspapers for the Executive Department 

(7) obtaining books, "small packages," etc. for heads of bureaus 

(8) forwarding letters from the War or State Department to agents, commissioners, etc. 
in foreign countries.*' 

Signals, ciphers, and secret service. These were the elements of Norris's 
wartime service. His first office was located on Belvin's Block on 14th Street, 
between Main and Franklin. It was later moved to the south side of Bank Street, 
midway between 9th and 10th (although there is some evidence that Signal Corps 
tenancy of the former office was retained).^" The Bank Street location, a 
two-room office across from the southwest corner of the capitol grounds, opposite 
the famous old Bell Tower, was occupied for the duration of the war. Located in 
the heart of Confederate Richmond, it lay between the War Department on 9th 
Street and the President's office in the former U.S. Customs House at 10th and 
Main. The mere seven -odd blocks from his office, across the railroad tracks and 
north to his wartime home on Leigh Street between 9th and 8th'' would probably 



28. Brown, Signal Corps, U.S.A., Chap. 11. The estimated strength was given by Charles E. Taylor, 
"The Signal and Secret Service of the Confederate States," Confederate Veteran 40 (August-Septem- 
ber 1932): 303. Taylor's account, a primary source, continued in the September-October 1932 issue of 
Confederate Veteran, was a reprint from Thp North Carolina Booklet 2 (March 1903), published in 
Hamlet, N.C. The basis for his estimate is not known; however, my own research, which incorporates 
the Compiled Service Records in the National Archives, can account for over one thousand members, 
including Milligan's Independent Signal Corps. Considering the available information, Taylor's 
estimate appears valid. 

29. Cummins, "Signal Corps," pp. 99-100. 

30. W. S. Gregory, "The CSA Signal Corps," Confederate Veteran 3 (August 1924): 33. See also 
Confederate Museum Newsletter 3 (May 1966): 1. 

31. Norris Papers. 



174 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



have been viewed as quite convenient by Norris; Mr. Davis had to cover almost 
the same distance to his home. 

Fall and winter of 1862-63 were spent by Norris in putting the final touches on 
hls orgftrfzafiofi. fa liig jfantiary 3, 1863, report to the president, Secretary of War 
Seddon noted that: "The Signal Corps has been filled and organized and is now 
in effective operation. It justifies the expectations entertained of its utility and 
contributes materially to the dispatch of orders, the transmission of intelligence, 
and the general safety of the Army." 

The service Norris administered dotted the southern coastline, served armies 
in the field, and eventually extended to blockade runners at sea. It was a 
responsibility beyond that of any other officer of like rank, a fact Norris pointed 
out to Seddon in a letter of July 6, 1863, noting that "everybody else Chiefs of 
Bureau at the seat of Government are Colonel," and urging that he be made 
colonel, or at least lieutenant colonel.'' The one anomaly in Norris's total control 
was an independent signal corps under an equally independent and strong- 
minded individual, James F. Milligan. Nain«d, appropriately, the Independent 
Signal Corps, Milligan's corps held forth along the James and Appomattox 
Rivers, cooperating with Norris, but staunchly defending its prerogatives from 
his control. 

James F. Milligan seems to have been a rough specimen of that breed of iron 
seaman which typified the best in U.S. naval tradition. A midshipman in 1846 in 
the pre-Annapolis days, he saw service in the Mexican War and continued in the 
navy until 1850, when, frustrated by slow promotions, he resigned to enter the 
revenue service. On the day Virginia seceded, this Northerner by birth resigned 
and accepted a commission as lieutenant in the Virginia State Navy. Milligan 
was captain of the steamer Empire in 1861, operating in the Norfolk area, and 
there he set up a land signal system based on the marine signals then in general 
use. He transferred to the army in October 1861, was commissioned captain, and 
made signal officer for the Department of Norfolk. Milligan considered himself 
senior to Norris in signal experience and rank, and he strongly resented the 
elevation of Norris as chief of the Signal Corps. After the fall of Norfolk, Milligan 
made his headquarters at Petersburg. From that point he evidently carried on a 
running feud with his rival in Richmond.^'' 

It was one of Milligan's officers, Lieutenant R. A. Forbes of the 2nd Company, 
ISC, who created a minor scandal by bringing formal charges against Major 
Norris. Forbes accused him of being intoxicated while on a flag-of-truce boat on 
May 31. 1863, and of revealing to the enemy the signal "alphabet" used by the 



32. OR, ser. 4, 2: 289. 

33. CSR, William Norris. Concurrently the colonels were pleading to become generals. See letter of 
October 16, 1862, Col. Gilmer to wife, in James L. Nichols, Confederate Engineers (Tuscaloosa, 1957), 
p. 32. 

34. CSR, James F. Milligan; obituary, Virginian-Pilot, March 23, 1899; Register of the Commis- 
sioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States, Including Officers of the Marine Corps, 
tmd Others, for the Year 1849 (Washington, 1849), pp. 84-85; John W. H. Porter, A Record of Events 
in Norfolk County, Virginia, from April 19th, 1861, to May 10th, i862 ... (Portsmouth, 1892), pp. 
304-305; Civil War Naval Chronology (Washinfrton, Navy Department, n.d.), 6: 204, 224. Milligan 
was the commanding officer of Sidney Lanier, and the "Major M " of Lanier's Tiger Lillies. 



William Norris 



175 



Confederate Signal Corps. A court of inquiry convened on July 29,'* and on 
August 15 it issued a statement which thoroughly exonerated Norris, finding that 
the charges had been "loosely made without due care and investigation and 
should not have been entertained." "The private and official character of Major 
Norris remain unaffected," the court concluded, while Forbes was "subject to the 
grave censure of the department." At the conclusion of the ordeal, Norris was 
granted fifteen days leave on August 18. On his recommendation, Lieutenant 
James Carey served as acting chief.'' 

Norris was frequently absent from Richmond, but the fragmentary information 
available gives only hints about the nature and ^tent of his trips. As early as 
September 1862 he received a mileage allowance (ten cents a mile) for a trip from 
Richmond to Charleston, South Carolina, possibly his first official trip to that 
city. In the spring of 1863 (in addition to the flag-of-truce boat incident), Norris 
was in and out of Richmond in a peculiar role as escort officer for foreign visitors. 
He escorted Clement Vallandigham to Wilmington, North Carolina, and a few 
days later, in June, was traveling companicm and guide from Charleston to 
Richmond for Lieutenant Colonel A. J. L. Fremantle, of the Coldstream 
Guards. " (Fremantle and Norris hit it off well. They interrupted their train ride 
at Wilmington to see Mr. Vallandigham, and Norris spent several days showing 
Fremantle around Richmond, then took him to Drewry's Bluff, where they toured 
the batteries and went aboard the ironclad Richmond. In his book, Three Months 
in the Southern States, Fremantle praised the hospitality, personality, and good 
humor of Major Norris, who, interestingly, he identified as chief of the "secret 
intelligence" service of the Confederacy.) There are grounds for strong suspicion 
that Norris was also the anonymous and somewhat mysterious major who met 
and escorted Fitz Gerald Ross from Maryland across the Potomac to Richmond 
in May, 1863, following the "Underground Railway from Yankeeland to 
Secessia." 

There are records, too, of other trips, cryptic reminders in the form of forage 
allowances, special orders, and the like, now preserved in the National 
Archives." They tell of frequent trips in June 1863 to Culpeper, to "Headquar- 
ters, Army of Northern Virginia," and, in both June and July, to Staunton and 
Winchester. After the fifteen-day leave which followed his court of inquiry, 
Norris returned to duty at Richmond in September. A forage order of the 
following July covers four horses used by him February 18-29, 1864, in a trip to 
Milford, some twenty miles south of Fredericksburg, in Caroline County, 
Virginia. There is little else to piece together his activities during this period. 
(Sometime during the year his fifth child, George Gardner, died at the age of 



35. A&IGO Special Orders 176/XVII, July 25, 1863. 

36. OR, ser. 1, 28: 1095. 

37. A&IGO Special Orders 158/XIV; 196/XX. 

38. [A.J.L.] Fremantle, Three Months in the Southern States, April-June, 1863 (New York, 1864), 
pp. 198ff. 

39. Fitz Gerald Ross, Cities and Camps of the Confederate States, ed. Richard B. Harwell (Urbana, 
1958), pp. 9-11, I6n, 17n, and 18-20. 

40. CSR, William Norris. 



176 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



four.) What happened during that winter of 1863-64 would be of interest, for it 
could shed light on one of the mysteries of Norris's wartime service, Special Order 
#75. 

His frequent trips away from the office may have contributed to the situation 
which developed, for they permitted the emergence of a contender and led to a 
breakdown in the Signal Bureau. In his absence in 1863, as noted earlier, Norris 
had designated Lieutenant Carey, a young man and a fellow Marylander, officer- 
in-charge, in spite of the fact that a more senior officer, Captain William N. 
Barker, was on duty at the Bureau. By November, however, Carey had been 
ordered to Wilmington for field duty,*' and, in being shifted from headquarters, 
he cleared the way for Barker. 

Unlike the other officers of the corps, Barker was a Northerner, a Pennsylvani- 
an, by birth. He was, nevertheless, an ardent pro-Southerner, and, while 
employed as a Federal civil servant, he was described by a contemporary as being 
one of the first three to put on a secession badge in Washington, "with which, in 
full view, they boldly marched through the Treasury Department," where he 
worked in the Comptroller's Office." Soon after the inauguration of Lincoln, 
Barker took his wife and went south to join the Confederate Army, initially as a 
first lieutenant in the First Virginia Infantry. The forty -one-year-old Barker was 
among the trainees of Porter Alexander in July, 1861," thus he had a claim for 
charter membership in the corps, and he was among the first ten captains. Like 
Norris he was a refugee; like Milligan he came from the North. Unfortunately for 
Norris, Barker and Milligan got along well together, perhaps both feeling cheated 
by Norris's rise. 

Barker's duties involved supplies, training, verification of orders and requisi- 
tions, official correspondence, and other administrative matters. He was first 
noted as "Captain in charge of the signal corps" in July 1863, during the court of 
inquiry."" After Carey left Richmond, Barker evidently became more prominent, 
and the stage was set for trouble. 

The nature of that trouble, and how it came about, remains a mystery. A&IGO 
Special Order #75/XIII of March 30, 1864, simply ordered Norris to Dalton, 
Georgia, to report to General J. E. Johnston and take charge of his signal service. 
Since an endorsement for the promotion of a member of the corps, dated April 4, 
bears his signature, it is probable that Norris did not leave Richmond at once. 
Then, on April 16, just two and a half weeks after the first order. Special Order 
89/III relieved him of duty with the Army of Tennessee and ordered him to 
proceed with an inspection of the various stations in Georgia, Florida, and South 
Carolina, after which he was to proceed to Charleston and await further orders. 
Further orders on August 6, 1864 (SO 185/LVlI, A&IGO) directed him to inspect 
the various signal corps in Alabama, Mississippi, and East Louisiana. It was not 
until January 21, 1865, that he was ordered (SO 17/XXXVI, A&IGO) to return to 
Richmond and resume his duties. From April 1864 until February 1865, Norris 



41. A&IGO Special Orders 270/XVII. 

42. CSR, William Barker. 

43. Ibid.; see also OR, ser. 4, 1: 687. 

44. CSR, William Norris and William Barker. 



William Norris 



111 



was absent from Richmond, and in his place was William Barker. 

It is difficult, on the basis of th«^ap3i«ntary evidence now available, to decide 
whether to mark Barker down as an opportunist who took advantage of the 
absence of his superior, or as an equally ambitious professional with ideas of his 
own, who, in single-minded zeal, set out to reorient and reorganize the corps. 
Immediately upon Norris's departure Barker recommended the appointment to 
sergeant of Alexander W. Weddell, a clerk in the Bureau — em act which Norris 
viewed as improperly ju^pmg over more experienced men.*° (This same Weddell 
was to play a key role in an unexplained incident which occurred toward the end 
of Norris's absence, and which may, in fact, have prompted his r^urn.) In 
August 1864 Barker proposed to his superiors a full reorganization of the corps, 
providing for a colonel as chief, a lieutenant colonel for every general, a major for 
every lieutenant general, and so forth. "The different signal corps," Barker wrote 
in justification of his propoeal, "scattered «s they are from the Potomac to the Rio 
Grande, constitute so many independent commands which require constant 
attention. Besides this, in the frequent and necessary absence of the chief of 
corps, he should always be able to leave someone in charge of his Bureau 
possessing some rank and subject to responsibility," and for this last position he 
proposed an assistant adjutant general.*' 

But before continuing in an attempt to shed some light on the period of 
Norris's absence from Richmond, and Barker's stewardship of the Bureau, it is 
necessary to consider the other side of Norris's wartime service, the aspect which 
has only been noted in passing, but which could supply the missing links: the 
Secret Service Bureau. The wartime exiles from Maryland and the District of 
Columbia may have been the first to explore the possibilities of espionage, 
perhaps as a natural outgrowth of schemes to maintain contact with relatives and 
friends left behind. At the same time Porter Alexander was laying the foundation 
for the Confederate Signal Corps, he was already spending time with that 
handmaiden of signaling — intelligence. E. Pliny Bryan, "one of the earliest 
seccessionists in the Maryland legislature" and a volunteer private in the First 
Virginia, offered his services to Alexander, and, with the approval of General 
Beauregard, was trained in the signal system and sent into Washington to live, 
equipped to transmit back whatever information he obtained.*' Another of 
Alexander's volunteers, Charles H. Cawood, showed a talent for getting back and 
forth across the Potomac — the beginning of the "Secret Line." ** 

Shortly after taking over as Chief Signal Officer, William Norris proposed a 
systematic network into the North. The reply only hints at the scope of his idea: 

Adjt & Inspr Genls Office 

Capt Norris Sept 15th 1862 

Chf of Signal Corps 
My dear Captain 

1 have seen the Secy [of War Randolph]. He approved at once of your proposition, but 



45. Norris to V. Camalin, February 1865, in Norris Papers. 

46. CSR, William Barker. 

47. OR, ser. 1, 51 (2): 340-41. 

48. CSR, Charles H. Cawood. 



178 



Maryland Histohical Magazine 



says that the delay has been occaskmvd by his being obliged to refer the Canadian part 
of it to the Prest. He wishes you to f@i mi at once m^h the Bsltr & Wash ^y 
authority you wish can be had. 

Yows ... 

{Imp&c S.] Whiting [AAG]" 

This correspondence marks the official beginning of the Secret Line, an 
"underground railroad" linking way stations, agents, "safe houses," boatsmen, 
and sotltbera sympathizeis, and steretdiin^ from the Smith through Washington, 
Baltimore, New York, and eventually into Canada, comprising "mainlines" and 
alternatives. Names famous in Civil War espionage — Thomas Nelson Conrad, 
James H. Stirratt, and Franklin StrinfMfeir— were to become linked with this 
operation. What is not generally known is the association of the Secret Line with 
Norris and the Signal Corps. 

The mission of the Secret Line included transporting or escorting agents, 
scouts, and others (including such foreigners as Fitz Gerald Ross) to and from the 
North, observing and reporting enemy movements on the Potomac, acting as an 
^cial courier s«rvice, procuring northern newspapers, carrying letters and 
dispatches, and obtaining books and other items upon the order of officials in 
Richmond. In the administration of the Secret Line, William Norris wore a 
"second hat" — Chief of the Secret Service Bureati. Charles H. Cawood, who had 
been involved in similar pursuits as early as October 1861 (and gotten himself 
captured, imprisoned in the Old Capitol, and exchanged), was officer-in-charge 
on the Potomac, with a commission as Second Lieutenant in the Signal Corps, 
reporting directly to Norris.*" 

Both wartime and post-war evidence attest to the existence of the Secret 
Service Bureau. In at least two instances after the war Norris himself affirmed 
that he had headed that activity. In a letter of December 1866 he stated that "I 
was Chief of the Signal Corps & Secret Service Bureau of the Confederate States 
and, in a letter of May 1870 to Jefferson Davis, he wrote: 

With respect to the Secret Service Department and the very extensive cypher cor- 
respondence of the government, conducted through my office, I flatter myself that I 
gave you entire satisfaction. So far as I know, the confidence in my officers to whom 
was delegated this important trust, was in no instance misplaced.'^ 

The wartime evidence, while sparse, is conclusive; various documents preserved 
in the National Archives confirm the existence of the bureau and Norris's 
association with it. A statement on fuel consumption, dated December 1863, 
notes that "two fires are in constant use at Signal & Secret Service Bureau" 
(implying that one office served both functions) and is signed by Norris.*' Special 
equipment and supply requisitions during 1864, signed by Captain Barker, are 



^. Nwris Papers. 

m. cm., Ch«rtw H. Cawood. 

51. Letter of December 14, 1866, Norris to W. D. Henneu(?), the lawyer defending John H. Surratt, in 
Norris Papers. 

52. Ibid. 

53. CSR, William Barker. 



William Norris 



179 



made out for "quartermaster stores for Secret Service Line in Westmoreland Co., 
Va." (July 29), "courier for Secret Service" (August 4 and 13), and "forage for 
mules for Secret Service" (August 22), and serve as further examples. For the 
confirmed -skeptic ftere is«v«B »pdrftwl-*e*eterhead: "War D«*partmi5Mt, Secret 
Service Bureau, Richmond, Va." appears on a letter of February 23, 1864, signed 
by Norris, which requests a "light spring wagon for the service of the Bureau." 
And, althou^ no Confederate records tise the title, it is significant that Colonel 
Fremantle identified Norris as "the chief of the secret intelligence bureau at 
Richmond" and made no reference to Norris's signal corps involvement — seem- 
ingly an odd omission on the part of an astute military observer. (On his train trip 
from Charleston to Richmond with Norris as his traveling companion, Fremantle 
recalled that: "Major Norris told me many amusing anecdotes connected with 
the secret intelligence department, and of the numerous ingenious methods 
for communicating with the Southern partisans on the other side of the 
Potomac.")" 

Nothing found to date reveals when and by what authority the Secret Service 
Bureau was established, unless it was implicit in the original Norris proposal 
responded to in September 1862 (above). The December 1863 reference cited is 
the earliest evidence which has been found, althoti^ the Fremantle account took 
place in June 1863. Its activities, at least initially, must have embraced the 
duties of the Secret Line. Like Alexander, Norris grasped the intelligence 
implications of the signal corps — signal duty bordered on, or actually involved, 
functions which would today be considered in the realm of intelligence and 
counter-intelligence activities, activities such as reconnaissance, surveillance, 
intercepting enemy communications and deceiving the enemy through false 
communications, and scouting and maintaining courier lines in enemy territory. 
And of course the Signal Bureau maintained the secret codes and ciphers which 
are the traditional trappings of espionage. It would perhaps be more surprising if 
Norris had not ventured into the clandestine world, given the circumstances. 
Unlike the Signal Corps, however, there was no companion organization to carry 
out the secret service activities, no "Secret Service Corps," as it were. Men 
appointed or detailed to signal duty (such as Cawood) formed the cadre of the 
service, augmented by volunteers on both sides of the Potomac.'" 

Both Norris and Barker attempted to improve the prestige and efficiency of the 
secret service activity. They proposed making the chief a full colonel, granting 
military status to the volunteers employed on the Secret Line, establishing a 
corps for secret service work, and promoting the men then involved in the service. 
One request for a minimum of $200 per month to maintain the "lines across the 
Potomac" gives^n idea of the modest cost of these operations and affords an 
appreciation of the unpaid volunteers who, according to Captain Barker, "on this 



54. Fremantle, Three Months in Southern States, p. 202. 

55. Canan, "Confederate Military Intelligence," pp. 42-46, discusses the interwoven signal and 
secret service activities of Norris and Barker under the heading "War Department Espionage." John 
Bakeless, Spies of the Confederacy (Philadelphia, 1970), pp. 6 eind 380, teikes passing note of Major 
Norris, in spite of considering the Confederate Signal Corps "essentially an espionage service" (p. 6) . 



180 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



side, ae well as the Maryland side, were selected for their known loyalty and 
devotion to the cause." " 

The Secret Service Bureau itept its secrets well. The overlapping signal and 
menvk servke aefeM^es further dbfuscate Norris's tracks. AM yet the feelfeftg 
persists that only the top of the proverbial iceberg has been seen. There were, to 
be sure, other actual and proposed "secret service" (little "s") activities in the 
Confederacy, including an offkkilly orpmi»e4 and «bmpiated mine warfkre unit 
and a proposed "Polytechnic Corps." " Disregarding these, and the "special 
service" details assigned to individuals by local commanders, there remain some 
unresolved incidents which, in one way or another, touch on Norris and his men. 
Consider the following: 

(1) The Alleghanian affair: The burning and sinking of the Alleghanian by a 
Confederate raiding party under Lieutenant John Taylor Wood in October 1862 
resulted in the capture of the pilot employed by the raiders, one Peter W. Smith, 
who told his captors that "about a fortnight prior to the burning of the 
Alleghanian Lieuteimnt ^no. L.] Dq^ett, ei ihe Signid Corps, called mpon him, 
and read an order to him from the Secretary of War to act as a pilot for a force 
then organizing in Mathews County." 

(2) The Carey incident in Virginia: Pleasonton's capture in December 1862 of 
Lieutenant James Carey of the Signal Corps resulted in the disclosure that Carey 
was "on orders from Richmond directing him to proceed to King George and 
We^moreland counties for certain si^al properties of tJie rebels." In his report, 
Pleasonton referred to "these spies" and added: "I omitted to mention that 
Lieutenant Carey, the signal officer captured today, was taken in citizen's dress. 
I am also informed that the rebels have a uniform for their signal corps. This 
certainly places Lieutenant Carey in an unpleasant position, and one which 
should be thoroughly investigated. It certainly looks very suspicious to find one of 
his cOTps on this side of the river." " 

(3) Canadian operations: James D. Horan's Confederate Agent popularized 
the most audacious and extensive Confederate clandestine operations, those 
conducted out of Canada by Confederate agents, both civilian and detailed 
military.*" In his book Horan shows a reproduction of a "Confederate decoding 
machine used by headquarters in Richmond." The circular device pictured is a 
cipher disk manufactured on contract to the Signal Bureau by Francis LaBarre of 
Richmond, and its markings are "C.S.A." and "S.S." (Secret Service?). Horan 



56. CSR, William Barker. See also the statement by Norris quoted in Taylor {Confederate Veteran, 
40 [September-October 1932], 339-40). 

57. The Secret Service Bureau should not be confused (cf. Philip Van Doren Stem, Secret Missions of 
the Civil War [Chicago, 1959], p. 18) with a "Bureau of Special and Secret Service" proposed under 
House Bill No. 240, November 30, 1864, reintroduced January 30, 1866, which would have established 
a Polytechnic Corps — a combination of cloak-and-dagger, commando, and covert research and 
development organization. Nor should it be confused with the Secret Service Torpedo Company (OR, 
ser. 4, 3: 177). 

58. Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies in the War of the Rebellion (Washington, 
1894-1922), ser. 1, 8: 165-67. 

59. OR, ser. 1, 21: 841 and OR, ser 2, 5: 286. Carey was from Baltimore. 

60. James D. Horan, Confederate Agent (New York, 1954). The cipher disk is shown on p. 74; Norris's 
order (signed by Alex. W. Weddell) is shown on p. 72. 



Williarh Norris 



181 



also reproduces an order from Norris to Barker to instruct the holder of the 
device, Captain Thomas H. Hines, in the use of the cipher. Hines, the hero of 
Koran's book, was one of the key fig twes in Hie C)ttiadi«*i ope^atiOM. An6fti6r 
member of the Signal Corps, the famous scout Franklin Stringfellow, later 
recalled that he had been offered — and passed up — the mission which led to the 
exectition of John Yates Beall.*' Finally, ^Bfen M. Suwatt, wtese mysterious 
comings and goings as a Confederate courier figured in the trial in which his 
mother was sentenced and hanged — Surratt traveled under Norris's orders/^ 

(4) Military intelligence: 'I%e apparatus be«#»d by Norris pto^ided Jtccess to a 
variety of sources of information about the enemy— signal corps posts in the field, 
telegraph operators and wire-tappers, line-crossing couriers, no^+Viern newspa- 
pers, southern sympathizers, agents. Norris passed the information gained to his 
superiors and to commanders in the field, and his reports (generally raw, 
unevaluated information, at times little more than rumor) may be found 
scattered about in the Official Records.'^ In this capacity, perhaps more than in 
any other, Norris's signal and secret service roles merged.** 

When Major Norris was ordered to report to General Johnston in Georgia, it 
was, therefore, both the Chief Signal Officer and the Chief of the Secret Service 
Bureau who was being sent from Richmond to the field. No explanation for the 
move has been found. It could have been punitive^^ — to go West was to go to 
Siberia for other officers — and yet there is no evidence of official disfavor. The 
countermanding of the original order and the orders to "inspect things and await 
orders" appear a lame bureaucratic device to keep someone out on a limb, and 
yet the Inspector General of Field Transportation, Major A. H. Cole, was absent 
from Richmond on a lengthy tour of inspection during the same period 
(April-December 1864).** After all, Norris had not previously visited his signal 
empire. Barker's status was unclear — even he had problems deciding whether to 
style himself chief, acting chief, or simply "in charge." There were no published 
orders relieving Norris, or designating Barker, and when Norris was summoned 
back to Richmond his orders were to "return." 

Norris appears to have left Richmond in early April 1864. He was to have 
inspected posts in Georgia, Florida, and S®mth Carolina, then to proceed to 
Charleston. During the next three months he "vm in North and South Carolina 
and in Georgia. On July 5 he was in Wilmington seeing off J. R. Thompson, who 



61. The Rev. Franklin Stringfellow to Jefferson Davis, 1880, Franklin Stringfellow Papers, University 
of Virginia Library. 

62. See citation in note 51. See also Helen Jones Campbell, Confederate Courier (New York, 1864), 
pp. 41 and 43. 

63. See, for example, OR, ser. 1, 51 (2): 873. In additim to OR, see also Clifford Dowdey and Louis H. 
Manarin, The Wartime Papers ofR. E. Lee (New York, 1961), pp. 440-41 and 692, in which Lee (who 
acted as his own "G-2") dryly discounts two such reports forwarded by Norris. 

64. While Fremantle referred to Norris as chief of the secret intelligwice department, in Confederate 
records he is idmtified simply as "Major Norris of the Signal Corps." 

65. This view is tak«i by Ciman, "Ccmfederate Military Intelligence," p. 45, but I find the evidence 
inadequate to jiwtify such a conclusion. 

66. Cole was absent from around April to October, with an "acting" chief back in Richmond. See 
Henry Putney Beers, Guide to the Archives of the Government of the Confederate States of America 
(Washington, 1968), p. 163. 



182 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



was bound for London." He left Raleigh on July 14 with train tickets to 
Wilmington, Florence, and Charleston. On July 29 he was on the railroad from 
M#e€m to {3^Hiwbus,-h«idiiig west, ^de rs sf Aa^ust extendwd'feis inspection into 
Alabama, Mississippi, and East Louisiana. Sometime in 1864, possibly that fall, 
he may have moved his family to North Carolina. He rented the house of a Major 
A. M. Lewis in Raleigh (^oftg with a k©«»e s«aVant, Hemnah), accOTding to rent 
receipts for September and November through January. Medical bills covering 
July through October attest to sickness in the family — prescriptions for nine days 
in September alone totaled $155 — but done* indicate whose.'* 

Twenty years later, a "letter to the editor" of the Charleston News and Courier 
recalled "Col. Wm. Norris of Baltimore — a name well remembered by all who 
helped to defend our city in the terrible siege and bombardment." The writei 
went on to say that "Col. Norris was for a long time stationed in Charleston, often 
making his headquarters of St. Michael's steeple, in spite of the shells so 
persistently aimed at it and whistling around it. Col. Norris is a brother-in-law of 
our loved and respected fellow-citizen, the late Col. Peter Delia Torre. . . ." 

In mid-November Norris made a trip by train from Danville to Richmond, 
purpose unknown. Then, on January 21, 1865, he was ordered to return to 
Richmond and resume his duties. 

For the period of these ten or eleven months, William N. Barker ran the 
Richmond Bureau in Norris's absence. Retailing his grade of captain, Bariier 
was referred to variously as "in charge," "Chief of Signals," "Chief of Signal 
Bureau," and "acting chief." In the capacity of chief he was even consulted in a 
jwoposed redesigning of the Confederate flag." It appears, however, that "acting 
chief was the proper title, and that Norris never officially relinquished the 
post." Barker's proposals to reorganize both the signal corps and the secret 
service could be considered presumptuous for an acting chief, but there is no 
evidence that they were other than genuine attempts at improvement.'^ Barker's 
relationship with Major Milligan of the Independent Signal Corps was, unlike 
that of Norris, a cordial one, and during his tenure all was sweetness with the 
ISC." But something happened during those months; something caused the 
recalling of Norris. In his judgment the Bureau sank to an all-time low. The 
reasons, although not clear, are hinted at in a letter Norris wrote to a subordinate 
(and fellow Marylander), V. Camalin, upon his return to Richmond: 

I wish you would read the enclosed correspondence. [Not found. ] A lie circulated by that 
dirty ingrate & hypocrite [Alexander W.] Weddell is pretty effectually nailed to the 



67. Diary of J. R. Thompson, University of Virginia Library, entry for July 5, 1864. 

68. Dates and places established by materials in Norris Papers and CSR, William Norris. 

69. Charleston News and Courier, 22 January 1884. Clipping in Norris Papers. 

70. Richmond Whig, 14 February 1865. Captain R. E. Wilbourn, chief signal officer to Jackson and 
later to Early, was also consulted. 

71. Beers, Guide, p. 152, accepts Barker as chief in 1864; however, the Richmond Whig, 14 February 
1865, says "acting chief." Correspondence originated by and addressed to Barker during this period 
also varies in the title used, but I have found no record of official action which accords him the title of 
chief. 

72. OR, ser. 4, 3: 577-78 is an example. 

73. OR, ser. 1, 42 (1): 868. 



William i^orris 



183 



counter have had thoughts (believing that he never heard any such thing) of 

having the truth flogged out of him by a court martial: forcing the name of the author 
out of his "own bosom" by the fear of hand cuffs & Castle Thunder — but I have such 
contempt for the sulker that I will not dirty my fingers with him — Observe the flippant 
insolence of his endorsement — and its falsity too. For although the «tti^«(teful crMrtuie 
cares nothing about the man from whom he had received nothing but curtesies & favors, 
yet he does care very much about the existence of the Signal Corps. Should it be broken 
up the self styled "adjutant" would have to take a musket & be a man & if the story of 
his own friends be true, as to the remarkable "time" he made to the rear in an 
engagement with the Yankees, noth^ w^eM gff* him such a fit of the shudders. The 
"adjutant" does not appreciate properly his good luck in gettiiVg a Sergeant's 
commission. 

It was a shameful outrage [on the part of Barker) to put this clerk of a few weeks over 
the heads of men who have done gallant service at the front for years, and who was the 
very laziest & most worthless clerk I have ever had about the office. In another week I 
would have shipped him — And thus would have eased the Corps the disgrace of being 
rebuked by the President's order for neglecting the only duty ever required or ever 
done — the translating cypher Dispatches. If you want to enjoy a farce, read — the order 
& Letterbook df the party who have brought the Corps into such complete disgrace with 
the Government. Mr. [Burton N.] Harrison told the Prest, in the presence of the Secy of 
War, that the Corps had "become absolutely worthless' & the Sec'y assented — The 
"adjutant" (who knows perfectly well that Barker had no more authority to give him 
such a title than you had) sometimes verges cm the sublime — "My connection with this 
Bureau ceases this day" he writes to Dr. P. — Magnificant announcement! ! ! He ought to 
have said that he had sneaked into a position bombproof, the ( [word not clear]) of which 
were the merest farce & humbug. Mark him soon it will be proved. 
The "adjutant" is evidently ashamed of his Sergeant's place — He ought to thank his 
stars every time that his carcass (the body of a bullock & the head of the pig) is safe 
from Yankee bullets. Miserable creature. Place him in your estimation where this 
correspondence fixes him. 

Return the papers 

& believe me very truly 

William Norris'* 

The implication that the Bureau fell apart in Norris's absence cannot be 
substantiated from other evidence. Charles Elisha Taylor, a detailed private 
working in the Bureau during this time, and the only one to write about the 
activity, omits any indications of discord. Postwar relations between Norris and 
Jefferson Davis were so close that, whatever happened, it can not have been a 
personal slur on Norris. But both Barker and Weddell are heard from no more in 



74. Norris to V. Camalin, February 10, 1865, Norris Papers. This letter also reveals Norris's 
dispositim when aroused, tmd his "way vMi words." In the heat ctf the moment, however, he may 
have been unduly harsh with Weddell, whatev^ he felt to be the justification. Alexander Watson 
Wedd^l, a former Captain of Company G, 41st Viri^ia Infantry, had been dusaMed by wounds in the 
field and was appointed signal sergeawt on 3vmt 22, 1864, to tihe raitk May 6, 1864. After the war 
Wedd^l Mtwed tite Mpiseopal ninietxy md setved as rector af historie St. J^n's Church, 
Richm«Mid, cbek 1875-1^3. He is baried there (CSR, Alex. W. Weddell; Grace 1. S. Taliaferro, A 
Stay e/ St. Jbfe»'« Chm^, Henrico Pariih—In Virgmki, 1607-1964 Richmond, Va., 19e8p. His son 
is remembered in Richmond as a patron of the arts and ben^actor, after distilftiuk^ed service as 
an ambassador. 



184 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



Signal Corps happenings. Some adjustments in the conduct of secret service 
activities may have taken place in the winter of 1864-65, either an assumption by 
the State Bepartmertt of the Secret S*i*^ice Bureau's involvements or an 
expansion of existing sub rosa State Department activities.'^ People employed on 
a section of the Secret Line run by Sergeant H. H. Brogden of the Signal Corps, 
and engaged in running a boat across the Potomac for secret service activities, 
reported to the State Department rather than Norris's office in the early part of 
1865." The general disintegration toward the end might also have been felt. Two 
cases of security leaks came up, one involving the disclosure of the cipher key and 
the unauthorized reading of War Department cipher messages by civilian 
telegraph operators, and the other involving the disclosure that the State 
Department employed a boat crossing the Potomac on secret service activities. 
Members of the Signal Corps were cleared on both counts, but the mere 
accusations may have reflected that loss of prestige which Norris addressed in his 
letter above." 

By March 1865 the Bureau comprised Norris, Lieutenant Schley (another 
Marylander), Sergeant Gresham, and Private Taylor." On March 24, 1865, 
Norris pfocessed the last order for northern publications — some Engineer Corps 
manuals requested by the Confederate Engineer Bureau." Nine days later there 
was hasty packing and destruction of records as the evacuation of Richmond 
began. 

Major Norris traveled southward with the presidential party, accompanied by 
Private Taylor of the Signal Corps and two telegraphers.'" General Lee's 
surrender of the Army of Northern Virginia on April 9 caused the group to press 
on to North Carolina. There, the day before Johnston's surrender on April 26, 
William Norris finally achieved the colonelcy so long denied him. But it did not 
come in the post to which he had devoted his wartime service; rather, it was as 
Commissioner of Exchange (responsible for prisoners of war) replacing Colonel 
Robert Ould that Norris finally put on the three stars of colonel.*' The next day, 
April 26, William Barker was signing the oath of allegiance to the United States 
at Burksville, Virginia.*' 



78. When Thomas H. Hines was sent to Canada in March 1864 it was on orders of Secretary of War 
Seddon; but when he was sent back again in December 1864, it was on orders of Secretary of State 
Benjamin (Horan, Confederate Agent, pp. 72-73, 233). 

76. Norris to Secretary of State Judah P. Benjamin, March 7, 1865, inclosing the results of a security 
investigation concerning the "secret service of the State Department" (Ryder Collection, Tufts 
University Library). 

77. Ibid.; see also Confidential Circular of March 16, 1865 (copy in Norris Papers) and J. Cutler 
Andrews, "The Southern Telegraph Company, ..." Journal of Southern History, 30 (August 1964): 
342. 

78. These were certified by Norris to comprise the bureau staff at the time of the investigation of a 
leak (see footnote 76). 

79. Norris Papers. The notation that this was the last order processed is in Norris's own hand. 

80. Taylor, "Signal and Secret Service," 338-39; Norris Papers. 

81. Norris Papers. Norris preserved the notification of his appointment, by ord^ ©f Secretary of War 
Breckinridge, at Charlotte, N.C. While his claim to have attained the rank of colonel vss honored by 
Davis and Norris's associates, *s well as Union authorities, it of course was not acted on by the 
Senate, given the circumstances of the time. 

82. CSR, William Barker. 



William Norris 



185 



A little more than a week later. Colonel Norris was in Union hands. Questions 
were raised about his credentials and the position he held. Then instructions were 
passed to have him held and his papers thoroughly examined, and, finally, to 
arrest him and send him to the Provost Marshal in Richmond, for there had been 
rumors that he had in his possession money belonging to Union prisoners. In 
some desperation (Mrs. Norris was well along in her sixth pregnancy) Norris 
wrote on June 6 to his counterpart and wartime associate, U.S. Brigadier General 
John E. Mulford, Commissioner of Exchange in Richmond. He explained that he 
was in Raleigh on parole (suggesting that his family may have remained there in 
January) and that he wished to come to Richmond, or, if that were not possible, 
to send his wife and children to the North. By the end of the month Norris had 
cleared himself of the charges. General Mulford personally vouched for his 
status, as Norris appeared before him on June 22, 1865, "still wearing my uniform 
and sword," in Richmond (thereby doubtless making Norris the last Confederate 
Army officer still on active duty).'* On June 30 he stood before Lieutenant 
Colonel Albert Ordway, 24th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry, and the Provost 
Marshal in Richmond, and signed the slip of paper: "I, William Norris, do 
solemnly swear, (or affirm,) in the presence of almighty god, that I will 
henceforth faithfully support, protect and defend the Constitution of the United 
States and the Union of the States thereunder. . . Characteristically, 
Norris's signature was large and bold, a John Hancock: "allegiance, yes, but no 
regrets." That day he and his family sailed for New York. The war was over. 

Like so many of his generation who survived that war, Norris found the peace 
which followed unendurable. His health was poor, as was his wife's. Money 
faithfully invested in Confederate braids and in blockade runner shares ("Old 
Dominion Trading Company") was lost. They returned to Brookland near 
Reisterstown, and there in September 1865 their sixth child, a third son, was 
born. Reflecting the father's admiration and affection for his wartime chief, the 
boy was named Jefferson Davis Norris. A fourth son was born the following year. 
His name too recalled a friendship of long standing: William Catesby Norris, 
named for Catesby ap Roger Jones.'* 

During the winter of 1865-66, Norris made plans to go to Chile and enter the 
army there, with the rank of colonel, to introduce the Confederate system of 
signals. He explained to former private Charles E. Taylor in a letter of January 
29, 1866, that he was attempting to locate copies of "our Confidential circulars" 
and special signal apparatus, and concluded his letter: 

I am less & less satisfied & more & more loathe the Yankees — Expect to go in a short 
time to Chile where I will enter the army with my present rank (col) and introduce our 



83. Norris Papers, and OR, ser. 2, 8: 643. As a captain, 3rd NYV, Mulford had been the 
officer-in-charge of the £lag-of-truce boat in the James River off City Point, and had associated with 
Norris at that time. 

84. Notation by Norris in Norris Papers. Galveston surrendered on June 2, 1865, and is generally 
considered to represent the last Confederate Army position. 

85. Copy in Norris Papers; see also CSR, William Norris. 

86. Mentioned in various letters of the period, Norris Papers. 



186 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



S3fstem of signals — At the first, the very first fire of the gun which begins our next fight, 
& (every sign tells that the day is not very distant) I will be back again and how 
infinitely harder I will struggle next time — Infinitely better for us all to die than live in 
social &i pditieal union with the wretches. . . 

On December 14, 1866, Nonris risked the 4ittle he had left in a letter to the 
lawyer defending John H. Surratt from complicity in the Lincoln assassination. 
Unsolicited, the act was characteristic of the man. He stated: "I was Chief of the 
Signal Corps & Secret Service Bureau of the Confederate States & am 
acquainted with the antecedents of John H. Surratt. He frequently forwarded 
important military intelligence (in cypher) from our friends in Washington and 
assisted our messengers in passing to & fro between Richmond & the Northern 
Cities." °' Norris went on to absolve Surratt of any involvement and offered to 
testify in his behalf if required. 

In 1870 what appeared to be an opportunity for a new start was offered when, in 
March, he was contacted with a proposition to go to Egypt and resume his 
military career as a signal officer, along with other veterans of the war, northern 
and southern. He eagerly accepted, and sought letters of recomi»^dation from 
his friends, among them Jefferson Davis. Davis provided the letter: 

I offer to you my parting salutation and avail of the occasion to express the high opinion 
I have ever entertained of your zeal and capacity as chief of the signal corps of the 
Confederate States, niough communicating by signal and in cypher is as old as the 
time of Polybius its application to military correspondence and message on the field of 
battle had been so little systematized and developed when you were put on charge of the 
Confederate Signal Corps, that the art might for practical purposes be regarded as a 
new one. By judicious arrangement and administration it attained to high efficiency 
and to you largely belongs the credit for that result. . . 

But Davis also wrote a parallel letter on the same date, expressing his personal 
feelings in the matter: 

Memphis T[enn] 
15th June 70 

Dear Col. Norris, 

I have written as you wished and enclosed the letter to Com. Catesby ap R. Jones. 

The present condition of our country is sad enough to make any one of us wish to leave 

it: but there is virtue and manhood in the country, which may at an hour when not 

expected restore it to its liberties, and right whatever is remediable. 

The women of the South have never faltered, their children will rise up to show how 

worthy their mothers were. This may not be in our day, it can hardly be in mine, but if 

lingering here we can hasten the coming of the day of deliverance, is it not well to watch 

and wait? You will perceive that while I have written as in duty bound a letter to serve 

your Egyptian views, it has been done despite my wish that you would not go. 

I shall be expectant of the Photograph of my namesake and hope during the summer to 



87. Charles E. Taylor Papers, University of Viirginia Library (by permission). 

88. Norris Papers (see citation in footnote 51). 

89. Copy in Norris Papers. 



William' Norris 



187 



see him and his Mother, and then to join them in an argument against your leaving a 
people who love you, and whom you can trust at least further than any others. 
I regretted very much your absence when in Baltimore last fall. Please present me 
affectionately to Mrs. Norris and Master Jefferson and believe me ever faithfully 

Your ft*erid 
Jefferson Davis'" 

As the weeks passed the tension — born of waiting for word and the tug of 
Davis's plea — must have increased for Norris. A note of pathos, perhaps even of 
desperation, creeps into a letter of July 6, 1870: "I have been very desirious of 
going for my reason & judgment have been drowned in a flood of superstitious 
sentiment that this was to have been my 'Tide which taken &c &c' & which since 
the war has been running strong ebb." A few days later he was notified that 
instructions had been received from Egypt not to send any more officers without 
specific orders, "not even Norris." That was perhaps the closest Norris came to 
joining what amounted to the first military assistance advisory group from the 
United States — former enemies who went to serve the Khedive." Although the 
subject persisted in his correspondence into October, Norris must have lost hope, 
if not interest, in the enterprise. Nevertheless, as late as 1875, hearing that 
General Joseph E. Johnston was going to Egypt, Norris dashed off a letter saying 
that he, too, would like to go, but Johnston's response squelched the rumor and 
dashed any remaining hope. 

There is little to shed light on Norris's later years. In 1874 his eyewitness 
account of the Monitor and Merrimac battle was published in the Southern 
Magazine.^^ In 1885 he was presenting lectures in the area, but his subject is 
unknown. One elderly resident of a nearby town recalled that an annual event at 
the Norris home was the gathering of the old veterans from the Confederate 
Soldiers' Home in nearby Pikesville and the tapping of a barrel of fine Maryland 
rye.'' The next morning, according to this informant, the roadway back to the 
soldiers' home would be dotted with stragglers who could not make it back. (The 
same old gentleman recalled a confirmation at All Saints Episcopal Church, 
Reisterstown, and his surprise at seeing among the well -scrubbed young faces, 
one white-haired old man, proud and erect — "Colonel Norris." The story may be 
apocryphal, but it sounds in character.) 

The war must never have gone far from his mind. In a letter of April 14, 1885, a 
former associate (Camalin, to whom Norris had vented his wrath over Weddell 
and Barker) relived the days at the Signal Bureau and concluded, "Can we not 
take charge of the U.S. Signal Bureau? Or some other Department?" This, to the 
old major, now in his sixties.®* 



90. Original in possession of a granddaughter of William Norris, and loaned to the writer. 

91. An account of this first American "Military Assistance .Advisory Group" is William B. Hesseltine 
and Hazel C. Wolf, The Blue and Gray on the Nile (Chicago, 1961). 

92. Supplement to The Southern Magazine (15 [1874]; 175-86) containing the report of The Southern 
Historical Society. Norris's "The 'Virginia' and the 'Monitor' " comprises a lengthy response to an 
article of June 13, 1874, in the Army and Navy Journal. 

93. Interview of Mr. William D. Groff of Owings Mill, Maryland, near Reisterstown, June 11, 1966, by 
the writer. 

94. Norris Papers. 



188 



Maryland Histokical Magazine 



In 1890 fire destroyed the Norris home. Both the Colonel and Mrs. Norris were 
sick at the time, but were safely removed. The bulk of Norm's FeroamiHif f»^rs 
and memorabilia, the sword still worn pronadly two months after Lee's surren- 
der — these, and perhaps history's best chance to learn firsthand the details of the 
"Signal irod Secret Service Bureau" of the Confederacy, were lost in that fire. In 
November 1895 he turned over some remaining naval papers to the War Records 
Office, leaving only a few personal papers.*' 

The tod came swiftly, a few weeks after his seventy -sixth birthday. On 
December 29, 1896, Norris was standing in the yard at Brookland, watching some 
workmen, when he suffered a stroke. He was unconscious when they raised him 
up, and he died before medical assistance could be rendered.** Last surviving 
member of the Yale Class of 1840, lawyer, member of the Maryland Society of 
California Pioneers, eyewitness to the Virginia and the Monitor, Chief of the 
Signal Corps and the Secret Service Bureau of the Confederate States, colonel 
and Commissioner of Prisoner Exchange, friend of Davis, Beauregard and 
Johnston, William Norris was laid to rest in the quiet churchyard of All Saints in 
Rmterstown, Maryland, and forgotten by the South he loved and served and by 
his native state. Surely he deserved better. 



95. Baltimore Sun, 30 December 1896. 

96. Ibid. 



The Depression in Maryland: 
The Failure of Voluntai?3^iM£i 



CHARLES M. KIMBERLY 



On October 24, 1929 — "Black Thursday" — a record 13 million shares 
were sold on the New York Stock Exchange and prices dropped further than 
ever before in the history of the exchange. The Great Crash had occurred, signal- 
ing the beginning of the Great Depression.' During the first few months follow- 
ing the stock market crash Maryland businessmen, like their counterparts 
elsewhere in the nation, repeatedly expressed their confidence that the funda- 
mental structure of the economy remained sound and that the business slump 
would soon end. Private charity and balanced state budgets represented, they 
believed, the appropriate response to the problem. Within two years events 
would force business and government officials to accept federal aid, but at first 
they preferred to wait for a "natural" cure. In its monthly journal, Baltimore, the 
Baltimore Association of Commerce tried to maintain an attitude of cheerful 
optimism despite the continuing collapse of the economy. "Industry as a whole 
is in good shape," the association reported in its April 1930 summary of economic 
conditions in Maryland. "Good shape" in this case described a local economy in 
which production of machinerv was running at 80 per cent of the normal level, 
men's clothing at 70 per cent, and petroleum products at 60 to 70 per cent.^ In 
September the association reported that conditions were "hopeful." But it went 
on to report that the wholesale market was spotty, that retail trade was generally 
down, and that many canneries had been forced to close because of the drought 
that had ruined farm crops that summer.^ 

In February of 1931 a special census taken by the Metropolitan Life Insurance 
Company set the unemployment rate iii Baltimore at 19.2 per cent/ In April the 
Association of Commerce looked into the future to see what lay "around the 
corner." It saw a spurt in business lasting at least through the summer. Large 
government appropriations for construction work and passage of the bill giving 
bonuses to World War I veterans would provide the stimulus for the spurt. Prices 
had hit rock-bottom, the association maintained, and retail sales were about to 
pick up because the buying public knew a bargain when it saw one.' That month 



Mr. Charles M. Kimberly is a part-time instructor of history at Northern Virginia Community 
College. 

1. New York Times, October 25, 1929. 

2. "Business Con<liti<a)s in Baltimore Area," Baltimore, 23 (April 1930): 9. 

3. "Business Conditions in Bidd^imore Area," ibid., (September 1930): 9. 

4. "BaltimOTe Lees Hurt," ibid., 24 (February 1931): 43. 

5. "Business Going Ahead," ibid., (April 1931): 41. 

189 

Maryland Histomcal Magazine 
Vol. 70, No. 2, Summer 1975 



190 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



the index for employment in Maryland factories stood at 93.1. It had been at 
129.3 five years earlier. In July it slid to 87.9, in December to 80.5. It continued to 
drop steadily until it reached 64.2 jn March of }.93^.' 

Maryland's governor durinfJ^ilVlMifeia^ ^Sftt^ wk Alfefert C. Ritchie. By 
1930, when he won election to his fourth consecutive term as governor, Ritchie 
had become something of a political fixture in the state. His political career had 
begun during the Progressive Era. In 1912 he gafined wide "public renown as 
Assistant General Counsel for the Public Service Commission of Maryland when 
he successfully prosecuted a case against the Gas and Electric Company of 
Baltimore. The case resulted in a savings of $500,000 to the city's consumers and 
gave Ritchie a reputation as the champion of the "little man," despite his 
aristocratic family background and manner. Ritchie was first elected governor in 
1919, winning the e'lection by only 165 votes. Once in office, however, he gained 
control of the state Democratic organization and became very popular with the 
voters of Baltimore City, partly because of his strong stand against prohibition. 
He was re-elected in 1923, 1926, and 1930 by sizeable majorities.' 

Ritchie was a stalwart opponent of federal intervention in local affairs. In his 
political speeches he lashed out at federal programs that offered funds to the 
states but attached conditions that gave the federal government control over the 
way in which the funds were spent. That practice, he asserted, was an insidious 
device for encroaching upon the constitutional rights of the states.' Ritchie's 
stand against prohibition was couched in terms of opposing the spread of 
governmental power. He objected to a government that tried to regulate the life 
of its citizens. He claimed that the twentieth century American was a victim of 
govmimental dictatorship v/iimever be looked. "Here he is told what he may 
eat, there what he may smoke, and everywhere what he may drink," Ritchie 
complained.' 

The increasingly serious unemployment following the Crash posed a difficult 
philosophical problem for Ritchie. He abhorred the thought of governmental 
intervention in the realm of social welfare or in the economy. Yet he recognized 
the ultimate responsibility of the government for the well-being of its citizens. 
The unemployment crisis had to be ended — preferably, he thought, by programs 
originating from the business community itself. Ritchie was attracted to 
company -sponsored unemployment insurance plans. He tried to impress upon 
businessmen the urgency of accepting those plans as an alternative to govern- 
mental action. Ritchie warned bv^inessmen that the nation was at a crossroads. 
Along one road lay "the opportunity for initiative and constructive effort on the 
part df American business to discharge its responsibilities to the labor whose toil 



6. Maryland, Commissioner of Labor and Statistics, Foriy-Seeond Annual Report of the Commis- 
sioner of Labor and Statistics, 1933 (Baltimore, 1934), p. 52. 

7. James B. Levin, "Albert C. Ritchie, A Political Biography" (Ph.D. dissertation. City University of 
New York, 1970), pp. 25-», 71-86. 

8. Albert C. Ritchie, "The 'Fifty-Fifty' System of Federal Aid, Why It Should be Stopped," address to 
the 17th annual conference of governors, June 30, 1925, in the Library of Congress. 

9. Albert C. Ritchie, "Which Shidl it be, A Government of Law or a Government of Men," Pamphlet 
no. 208 in "Pamphlets on Prohibition in the United States, No. 193-225," in the Library of Congress, 
p. 10. 



The Depression in Maryland 



191 



and sweat in the shops is as essential as the brains and directing hand at the 
desk." Along the other road lay "the ultimate certainty of legislation which may 
prove hurtful to business itself and to the community, a drain on liie pui>lic 
treasury, and a departure from American institutions. " 

Ritchie did not envision an active role fos the state government in dealing with 
the pn-oblems caused by widespread unemployment. Had he wanted the state to 
play such a role it would have been necessary for him to create an organization to 
handle such matters. The Maryland state government in 1930 had no office or 
department prepared to deal with unemployment and relief problems. The Board 
of State Aid and Charities was responsible for matters that would today come 
under the heading of social welfare. Its duties, however, were largely advisory and 
inspectional. State assistance to the poor and aged came through legislative 
appropriations to private charitable organizations. The board's principal func- 
tion was to receive applications for state assistance from private institutions and 
recommend to the legislature how mtrch assistance each institution should 
receive." 

With the onset of the Depression the social welfare organizations receiving 
state support expanded their services as much as they could. The Veterans' 
Relief Commission spent its entire annual allotment of $50,000 for the first time 
in 1930 and in addition used up part of its unexpended funds from the preceding 
two years. Its annual allotment was raised to $60,000 by the 1931 state 
legislature, which also gave the commission emergency funds of $15,000 for 1932 
and $10,000 for 1933.'^ The Maryland Children's Aid Society provided emergency 
relief in several counties after 1930, in additkm to carrying out its regular 
child-care program.'* To create more state for construction workers. 

Governor Ritchie in 1930 directed state officios to begin all planned construction 
and maintenance projects as soon as i^oe^ible. By November of 1930 th«re were 
1,750 more men working on state highway and public works projects than in the 
preceding year.'' 

Beyond these limited efforts, the state government did little to deal with the 
unemployment and relief problenas. When the state legislature met in January 
1931 for its biennial session, Ritchie presented a program that stressed the need 
for stringent economy in government. In preparing the budget it was necessary, 
he told the legislators, to plan upon leaving a larger balance in the state treasury 
than had been the practice in the past because of the possibility that actual 
revenues might fall short of the estimated revenues. About all that the state 



10. Albert C. Ritchie, "Unemployment Relief — If Business will do nothing about it, Government 
will," address to the Virginia Bar Association, July 30, 1931, Box 8006 (12), Governor Albert C. 
Ritchie Executive Papers, Hall of Records, Annapolis, Maryland. (Hereafter cited as Ritchie 
Executive Papers.) 

11. Maryland Manual: A Compendium of Legal, Historical and Statistical Information Relating to 
the State of Maryland (Baltimore, 1931), p. 44. 

12. Albert C. Ritchie to Milton A. Reckord, August 12, 1930, Box 8006 (18), Ritchie Executive Papers. 

13. Maryland Manual, 1932, p. 39. 

14. Douglas Gorman to Albert C. Ritchie, July 23, 1932 ; and Walter N. Kirkman to Albert C. Ritchie, 
August 6, 1932, Box 8006 (9), Ritchie Executive Papers. 

15. Baltimore Sun, December 7, 1930. 



192 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



c#uld do to combat the unemployment problem, Ritchie asserted, was to 
undertake all feasible public works projects. That had been state policy for some 
time, he said, and all authorized state construction work was either finished or 
under way.'^ Most of the state legislators shared Ritchie's view that the 
responsibility for providing relief for the unemployed rested with local charitable 
organizations — that was still common wisdom in most of the nation in 
1931" — and the legislature did not spend much time considering any program to 
care for the unemployed. 

The state government's limited efforts at dealing with the problems caused by 
incr^sing unemployment were matched by similarly limited efforts by local 
governments. The city of Baltimore, whose 800,000 citizens made up half of 
Maryland's population in 1930, was more seriously affected by the crisis than 
moet other ai?eas in the state. The administration's only solution to the 
problem was to set up an agency to help people look for jobs. In May of 1930 
Mayor William F. Broening announced the establishment of the Commission on 
Employment Stabilization. One of the commission's first actions was to 
distribute an "emergency code of employment practice" to local businesses and 
industries. The code suggested methods by which the companies could help 
alleviate unemployment. These included giving preference to family heads in 
hiring, reducing the number of working hours per employee rather than laying off 
some of them, and creating jobs by doing painting, repair, and renovation work 
that might ordinarily be postponed. In December of 1930 the commission 
established the Municipal Free Employment Service. In its first eight months of 
operation the employment service registered 7,713 job seekers. It managed to find 
work for about one-fifth of them." 

These efforts proved to be ineffective in stemming the spread of unemploy- 
ment. Many of the unemployed soon used up their meager resources and were 
forced to go to charitable organizations for help. Baltimore's relief problems had 
traditionally been handled by four agencies — the Family Welfare Association, 
the Bureau of Catholic Charities, the Jewish Social Service Bureau, and the 
Salvation Army. Of these agencies the Family Welfare Association handled 
about 80 per cent of the city's relief cases.'' The Family Welfare Association was 
not prepared for the large influx of relief applications that came during the winter 
of 1930-31. That winter the association was asked to aid five times as many 
families each month as it had helped in an entire year in normal times. For ten 
days in October it was forced to turn away all new applicants because it did not 
have enough money to give them assistance. The increasing demand for relief 
forced the relief agencies to appeal to the municipal government for financial aid. 
The municipal government allocated $8,900 to the Family Welfare Association 

16. Maryland, Secretary of State, Message of Governor Albert C. Ritchie to the General Assembly of 
Maryland of 1931 (Baltimore, 1931), pp. 1, 61-2. 

17. For responses to the unemployment crisis in otlier states see James T. Patterson, The New Deal 
and the States: Federalism in Transition (Princeton, 1969), pp. 30-1. 

18. Report of the Municipal Commission on Employment Stabilization and the Municipal Free 
Employment Service (n.p., 1931), pp. 2-3, 10. 

19. Anna D. Ward, ed., "Relief Bulletin," No. 1, February 3, 1936, p. 1, mimeographed bulletin in 
"Social Welfare, Baltimore," in Vertical File, Maryland Room, Enoch Pratt Free Library, Baltimore, 
Maryland. 



The Depressien in Maryland 



193 



and $3,900 to the Jewish Social Service Bureau, thus enabling those agencies to 
meet their expenses, but it did so only after a long delay that expressed the city 
officials' reluctance to take such a st^.*® To relieve the 'strahr on' the welfare 
agencies the police department unofficially assumed the burden of providing 
relief to the needy. In December Police Commissioner Charles Gaither an- 
nounced that the department would acce^ morretary donations and gifts in kind 
to help the needy. By mid-Februarv the police had given food and fuel to 7,500 
families and had fed 6,600 persons at the station houses. 

By January of 1931, 42,000 of the city's workers — one out of eight — were 
unemployed. Nineteen bread lines were in operation. There were 2,750 families 
receiving aid from the relief agencies. Within two months a thousand more 
families w&re added to the relief rolls. Tht relief agencies again used up all 
available funds. In February the Baltimore Association of Commerce organized a 
Citizens' Emergency Relief Committee to operate a drive in hopes of collecting 
enough money to enable the agencies to meet relief demands. Mayor Broening 
started off the drive by contributing $50,000 from the city's contingency fund. He 
also agreed to supply trucks and warehouses to assist the agencies in handling 
contributions of food and clothing. The drive culminated with "Self-Denial Day" 
on Good Friday, March 27. In keeping with the Lenten season citizens were asked 
to deny themselves a desired item and use the money instead as a contribution to 
the needy. Ballot boxes were set out in stores, movies, library branches, and on 
street corners. At noon church bells rang and firehouse whistles sounded as a 
signal for people to drop their contributions into the ballot boxes. The ballot 
boxes yielded $90,000 and the relief campaign brought in a total of $669,000; 
enough, it was hoped, to carry the relief agencies through the year.^' 

In May Baltimore's voters elected a new mayor, Howard W. Jackson, "a 
businessman's businessman." Like Ritchie, Jackson was an economy-minded 
man whose business-like qualities were those of the accountant rather than the 
entrepreneur. His main business was politics. He had worked his way up through 
the Baltimore Democratic Party's system of ward politics and had previously 
served a term as mayor from 1923 to 1927.^" Jackson promised the citizens of 
Baltimore that the municipal government would do all it could to provide 
employment and relieve distress. When the existing agencies become overbur- 
dened, he said, the city must be ready to help. But he also informed the citizens 
that the times demanded that the city conserve its resources and make no 
expenditures unless absolutely necessary. "I shall advise all department heads 
that rigid economy must be practiced from today," he vowed, "and I shall insist 
that the policy be followed. 

It was not long before Jackson's views on relief were seriously tested. 

20. Anna D. Ward, Annual Report of the Family Welfare Association of Baltimore, 1930 (n.p., n.d.), 
pp. 7-9. 

21. Baltimore Sun, February 14, 1931. 

22. "Civil Works Administration Activities in Maryland," pp. 26, 35, Record Group 69, Federal 
Emergency Relief Administration, National Archives. 

23. Baltimore Sun, February 14, 1931; February 17, 1931; March 29, 1931. 

24. Frederic A. Kummer and Ferdinand C. Latrobe, The Free State of Marylmid: A History of the 
State andlts People, 1634-1941, 4 vo\s. (Baltimore, n.d.), 4:1519-20. 

25. "Mayor Jackson Now at Helm," Baltimore Municipal Journal, 19 (May 22, 1931): 4. 



194 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



Unemployment continued to rise. In September Baltimore's unions reported that 
31 per cent of their members were completely unemployed and another 27 per 
cent were able to-ft»d-«*ly p»rt*t*Bie fffflflS. "Hii %i«^M!fl-| ^«(!te«'\si*!^s r^fwrted 
62 per cent totally unemployed. The effects of the prolonged widespread 
unemployment were seen in the increasing numbers of unemployed workers 
who were forced to appeal to fSie SiaiffeMe organfestions to help. The 
Family Welfare Association released « StiSlement on October 1 stating that 
the funds raised by the Citizens' Emergency Relief Committee would be 
exhausted by October 20. The statement concluded with a parafrsfph revealing a 
feeling of impotence in the face of the growing crisis: "Our own regular income for 
the year from the Community Fund and all other sources will not begin to carry 
the load until the end of the year. How the needs are to be met, we do not know. 
Never in the experience of the organization have we seen so much suffering and 
such dire conditions of want as exist now."^' 

That month the municipal government loaned $150,000 to the Citizens' 
Emergency Relief Committee with the understanding that the loan would be 
repaid by January 1 from funds received from the Community Fund's fall charity 
drive. But it soon became apparent that extraordinary measures would be 
required to cope with the relief situation. The number of people needing relief 
was increasing at an alarming rate — 3,800 families in September; 5,100 in 
Novemb**; 7,800 in December; 11,100 in January; 14,100 in February.^' The 
Family Welfare Association had to acquire office space in five additional 
buildings to handle the crowds which were thronging to it for aid. The association 
increased its staff from 61 to 152 persons, but still many social workers were 
responsible for the care of from two to three hundred families.^' 

As each passing week brought ever-increasing numbers of unemployed persons 
to the relief agencies, the city's relief workers came to realize that the problem 
was of such magnitude that the customary method of relying upon private 
charity to care for the needy was simply inadequate. At the beginning of March, 
W. Frank Roberts, the Chairman of the Citizens' Emergency Relief Committee, 
informed Mayor Jackson that the relief agencies were using up funds at the rate 
of $50,000 a week. At that rate existing funds would be exhausted by the end of 
the month, Roberts told the mayor. It was apparent that large scale governmen- 
tal assistance was imperative; the only question was what form it would take.^° 

On March 13 Mayor Jackson and Governor Ritchie met to discuss the problem. 
They were unable to agree upon a plan, but they decided that the fnayor would 
make available to the relief agencies up to $100,000 from his contingency fund 
while a plan was being worked out.^' On March 18 Ritchie called a conference to 



26. Untitled summary of unemployment among Baltimore union members, Entry 4, Classincation 
No. 620.1, Record Group 73, President's Organization on Unemployment Relief, National Archives. 

27. Anna D. Ward, "Statement Concerning Unemployment Relief, the Present Situation and the 
Outlook for 1932," in "Social Welfare, Baltimore," Vertical File, Maryland Room, Enoch t*ratt Free 
Library, Baltimore, Maryland, p. 5. 

28. "CWA Activities in Maryland," p. 35. 

29. Anna D. Ward, Family Welfare Association Annual Report, 1931, p. 3. 

30. Baltisaiore Sun, March 4, 1932. 

31. Ibid., March 14, 1932. 



The Depression in Maryland 



195 



which he invited several state and municipal officials and the leaders of the 
Baltimore relief effort. Ritchie decided that the first thing to be done was to 
obtain an accurate estimate of future needs. He suggested that his advisor on 
budpitaiy and economic matt^, Walter N. Kirkman, should meet with Police 
Commissioner Gaither, other appropriate city officials, and representatives of the 
relief agencies to determine how much money would be needed. He then gave his 
views on the policy to be followed in giving state aid: 

I would not be disposed to have the state government appropriate any sum of money 
which would be distributed for relief purposes in the form of donations, gifts, or doles. I 
consider that this would be inconsistent with our ideals and institutions; that it would 
tend to destroy self-initiative and individual enterprise and that it would constitute a 
charge upon the public treasury which it would be very difficult to terminate and would 
add unduly to the tax burdens of the peofde.'* 

Ritchie expressed his support at the conference for a plan by which the state 
would issue bonds to raise the money needed to finance Baltimore's relief 
expenditures. The state would then loan the money to the city and would be 
repaid later. Ritchie had some misgivings about the plan, feeling that it 
conflicted with a provision in the state constitution restricting Baltimore's ability 
to incur a debt. Moreover, he still hoped that Baltimore could find some way to 
handle the relief problem by itself. Four days after the conference he discussed 
the problem with Jackson in a meeting that lasted until three o'clock in the 
morning. Jackson left the meeting with the impression that some sort of state 
assistafice would eventually be forthcoming once the legal difficulties were 
worked out.'^ 

The conference held on March 18 dealt with the relief situation in the counties 
as well as in Baltimore City. Governor Ritchie had been kept informed of 
conditions throughout the state by the state agricultural agents and by members 
of Drought Loan Committees set up the preceding year to help drought-stricken 
farmers obtain loans. Surveys had been conducted among the agricultural agents 
in September and December 1931 to determine how badly the counties were 
affected by the spreading unemployment. Two days before the conference the 
agricultural agents had been asked to comment on existing conditions. Their 
reports indicated that while conditions had gotten worse in sixteen of the 
twenty -three counties, the relief problem was acute only in Baltimore and Anne 
Arundel counties. Relief agencies in both counties had used up nearly all of the 
funds available to them.'* 

Several social workers attending the conference privately disputed the 
contention that the relief problem was acute in only two counties. They did not 
speak out at that time, however, because the Maryland State Conference of 
Social Work was still working on its own survey of unemployment relief in the 



32. Ibid., March 19, 1932. 

33. Ibid., March 19, 1932; March 23, 1932. 

34. Ibid., March 19, 1932; "Emergency Report on Survey of Unemployment and Depression 
Situation in Maryland Counties," in "Social Welfare," Vertical File, Maryland Room, Enoch Pratt 
Free Library. 



196 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



state. A report prepared by social wctfker Mary F. Bogue and based on that 
survey was made public in May. From the information she and her assistants had 
gathered during their visits to the counties, Miss Bogue concluded that the relief 
prbft&in was very serious in at least eight counties. Private resource liad already 
been exhausted in five counties — Baltimore, Anne Arundel, Garrett, Allegany, 
and Cecil. Three counties— Prince George's, Washington, and Wicomico — had 
successfully dealt with their relief problems the preceding winter but might not 
be able to do so again using only private funds. ^'^ 

The long depression in the coal industry — it had started in the early 
twenties — made the relief situation in Garrett and Allegany countiies the most 
serious in the state outside of Baltimore City - In February of 1932, 7.0 per cent of 
the families in Garrett County and 6.6 per cent in Allegany County were on 
relief. Many of the smaller mines had been closed about half of the preceding 
year. Consolidated Coal Company, *^he largest company in the Maryland coal 
fields, encountered considerable financial difficulty and finally went into 
receivership in June 1932." The state Bureau of Mines reported that its safety 
inspectors were greatly hindered in their work by the fact that they would 
sometimes have to visit half a dozen mines before they could find one in 
operation. The troubles in the coal industry had already crippled the economies 
of these two counties before the Depression began. Their resources were simply 
inadequate to meet the relief needs arising from the greatly increased 
unemployment.'' 

The problems in Baltimore and Anne Arundel counties were due to high rates 
of unemployment in the areas contiguous to Baltimore City. In Cecil County 
many of those on relief were persons whose incomes had been barely above the 
poverty level in prosperous times and who now were unable to find any work at 
all. A considerable number of blacks fell into that category. Two-thirds of the 
blacks in Elkton were unemployed in the spring of 1932. Prince George's County 
had depended upon a $12,000 contribution from federal employees to make it 
through the preceding winter. If a similar contribution was not forthcoming for 
1932-33 the county would be in serious trouble. Washington County, which 
contained the state's third largest city, Hagerstown, had a relatively large 
number of persons on relief. The fact that none of the Washington County schools 
could supply clothing for school children after April was a sign of impending 
trouble. Wicomico County was suffering from increasing unemployment which 
threatened to become too severe for the county's limited relief resources.^' 

In addition to these eight counties where the social workers found serious relief 
problems, there were seven other counties where a difference of opinion existed 
over whether relief needs were being met. These counties were mostly rural 
counties where local residents felt that giving relief tended to "weaken the 



35. Mary F. Bogue, Report of a Study of Needs and Resources for Unemployment Relief in Maryland, 
Report to the Maryland State Conference of Social Work (Baltimore, 1932), pp. 70-3. 

36. Ibid., p. 31. 

37. Forty-First Annual Report of the Commissioner of Labor and Statistics of Maryland, 1932, p. 4. 

38. Fortieth Annual Report of the Commissioner of Labor and Statistics of Maryland, 1931, pp. 2-5. 

39. Bogue, Study of Needs and Resources, pp. 11-12, 70-73. 



The Depression in Maryland 



197 



character" of the recipient. Social workers in the counties felt, however, that 
there were people there who needed help but were not getting it. The truant 
officer in one of the counties told the social workers that she ificmi^ there were at 
least fifty families in the county who would benefit from relief. She had visited 
several homes, she said, where there was nothing but watercress to be served for a 
meal.*" 

The winter of 1931-32 had been a difficult one in many parts of the country, 
especially in the larger cities. Throughout the 1931-32 Congressional session the 
Hoover administration had struggled with the liberals in Congress over the 
question of using public funds for relief. In February 1932 the LaFollette-Costi- 
gan Relief Bill was defeated in the Senate by a 48-35 vote. Support for a relief bill 
continued to grow during the spring and summer, however, as city after city faced 
relief crises. In July Congress passed the Emergency Relief and Construction Act 
which authorized the newly formed Reconstruction Finance Corporation to make 
loans to the states for use in unemployment relief. The loans were obtainable at 3 
per cent interest and were to be repaid from highway grants beginning in 1935. 
The relief act contained a provision requiring the governor of the state applying 
for a loan to certify that the state's own resources were inadequate to meet its 
relief needs. The Hoover administration held the governors to a strict interpreta- 
tion of that provision as a means of restricting the number of loans.*' 
Nevertheless, through March of 1933, forty of the forty-eight states had applied 
for loans. ■'^ 

Governor Ritchie showed little inclination towards taking advantage of the 
RFC loans. A month after the act was passed George Henderson, the Mayor of 
Cumberland, wrote to Ritchie explaining that the relief organizations in 
Cumberland were spending far more than their budgets allowed and that they 
would need a loan of $25,000 to carry them through the winter. Henderson 
suggested that the state should take advantage of the federal funds made 
available through the RFC. Ritchie replied that the state could not loan the 
money to Cumberland without a special act of the legislature and that the state 
was not eligible for loans from the RFC because not all city, county, and state 
funds were exhausted. To another enquiry about Maryland's dealings with the 
RFC, Ritchie stated simply that the state had not applied for a loan and that 
moreover, "we are not expecting to do so. We think we will be able to take care 
of our own situation without applying to the Federal Government."*' 

Ritchie's readiness to do what was necessary to take care of the situation came 
under question in November when he became involved in a budget dispute in 
Baltimore City. During the twenties Baltimore City and several of the counties 
had been swept away by the optimism of the times and had incurred larger debts 



40. Ibid., pp. 47-8, 75. 

41. Arthur Schfesinger, Jr., The Age of Roosevelt, vol. 1, The Crkis of the Old Order {Boston, 1957), p. 
241. 

42. Baltimore Sun, March 29, 1933. 

43. George Henderson to Albert C. Ritchie, August 4, 1932; Albert C. Ritchie to George Henderson, 
August 5, 1932; and Albert C. Ritchie to Benjamin Marsh, November 1, 1932, Box 8006 (10), Ritchie 
Executive Papers. 



198 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



than they should have. As a result they were saddled with s"ubstantial obligations 
at a time when the taxable base wsb shrinking and tax delinquency was 
increasing due to the depressed ecottofmy. A cbiiimisgwia ap|)btrif6d by t^e 
legislature to investigate taxation in Maryland concluded that homeowners in 
the cities and farmers in the counties were bearing an undesirably heavy burden 
of direct property taxation.** Few of Baltimore's homeowners read the commis- 
sion's report, but by the fall of 1932 many of them had already reached the same 
conclusion. When Mayor Jackson announced in late October that the 1933 
budget would require an increase in the city tax rate, a wave of opposition arose 
against any tax increase. The leader of the opposition within the municipal 
government was City Council President E. Lester MuUer, who felt that the 
proposed budget should be reduced so that a tax increase could be avoided.*' 

Jackson and Muller argu«d pabliciy about the budget during most of 
November. By the end of the month the widesj^ead opposition to the tax ii*crease 
crystallized in the form of the Taxpayras' War Council, a coalitiorl of twenty-four 
organizations in the city claiming to represent over 62,000 citizens. On December 
7 the War Council held a mass meeting of the city's taxpayers. That night over 
4,000 irate taxpayers squeezed into Polytechnic Auditorium, where they con- 
fronted a rather subdued City Council and several speakers seated on the stage. 
The crowd was in a boistrous mood, freely cheering and booing speeches from the 
stage and opinions voluntewed from the audi^ce. They booed every mention of 
Mayor Jackson or his administration. They booed figures explaining the increase 
in the cost of operating the schools, they booed mention of the $100,000 
appropriation for new conduits, and they booed Muller, their own man on the 
City Council. Between boos they found time to pass a resolution asking the City 
Council to strike out every item in the budget that was not absolutely essential.** 

Governor Ritchie had become involved in the bu^et controversy on November 
3 when he attended a meeting of the Baltimore City Board of Estimates. After 
the meeting he released a statement urging an "earnest effort" to reduce the 
budget further and reviewing the state's role in helping to finance Baltimore's 
relief expenditures. He indicated that he would support legislation to raise the 
necessary funds, either through a state bond issue or by authorizing the city to 
borrow the money itself.*' A month later, though, Ritchie wrote a letter to 
Jackson expressing some misgivings about the plan for state financing of 
Baltimore's relief expenditures. He was bothered by the possibility that such 
legislation might be unconstitutional. "I think," Ritchie explained, "that when 
this funding question is taken up for consideration at the next session of the 
legislature that the legality of the proposition will necessarily be one of the points 
to be considered, because, naturally, I would not want to recommend a state 
bond issue if I felt that its legality was open to any serious question."*' 

44. Report of the Tax Survey Commission of Maryland Submitted to the Governor of Maryland and 
the General Assembly of Maryland, December 1, 1932, Jacob H. Hollander, chairman (Baltimore, 
1932), pp. 1-5. 

45. Baltimore Sun, November 4, 1932. 

46. Ibid., December 1, 1932; Decembers, 1932. 

47. Ibid., November 4, 1932. 

48. Albert C. Ritchie to Howard W. Jackson, December 10, 1932, Box 8062 (22), Ritchie Executive 
Papers. 



The Depression in Maryland 



199 



Mayor Jackson had been forced into an untenable political position on the 
budget issue. His position was further undermined when Baltimore's bankers 
learned of Ritchie's second thoughts about the bond issue. They sent word to 
Jackson that no more relief loans to the city would be approved until the tax rate 
for the proposed budget was reduced.** On December 14 Jackson made Ritchie's 
letter public and announced that because of the uncertainties created by the 
letter he was slashing the budget and reducing the proposed tax rate. Ritchie 
quickly arranged a conference with Jackson and released a statement saying that 
the letter had created a misunderstanding. What he had meant, he explained, 
was that he was not committed to suppwtMf any particular plan, but would wait 
until the legislature met before deciding upon a method of assistance, and that he 
would consider conditions in the entire state whm mad« his decision. 
Obviously, he said, the situation in Baltimore had to be taken care of by the state 
legislature.^" 

In devising a plan to finance Baltimore's relief expenditures, Ritchie had to 
consider not only the contending pleas for help coming from unemployed workers 
and overburdened taxpayers in the city, but also the voices from the counties 
calling for tax relief there. On November 28 county comrawSoners from 
seventeen counties met in Annapolis to coordinate plans for redticing county 
taxes. They agreed upon a program calling for reduction of the nmimum state 
school tax levy from $.67 to $.40 per $100 and diversion of state gasolrae tax fuiwis 
to the counties for maintenance of county roads. In January the county 
commissioners explained their program to county taxpayers in a series of mass 
meetings. The meetings w^ timed to exert pressure upon the county legislators 
who were in Annapolis for the 1933 legislative session.*' 

When the legislature convened on January 4 Governor Ritchie presented a 
legislative program that he hoped would satisfy both county and city representa- 
tives. The most important item of legislation was, of course, the proposal for 
funding Baltimore's relief expenditures. Ritchie recommended a plan based on a 
state tax on luxury items such as cigarettes, cigars, soft drinks, and chewing gum. 
The income from the tax on those items would be apportioned among the 
counties and Baltimore City on the basis of population. The portion belonging to 
the counties would be used to reduce their state taxes; the portion due to 
Baltimore City would be retained by the state and used to retire the state bonds 
which would be issued to finance Baltimore's relief expenditures for 1932 and 
1933." 

Ritchie's program met stiff opposition from the county legislators. The tobacco 
farmers in southern Maryland were not happy at the prospect of having an 
additional tax put on their product, especially when half of the proceeds were 
earmarked for Baltimore City. Many of the county legislators felt that a large 
percentage of the funds could be raised simply by putting a 10 per cent tax on 



49. Margarita Collins, "Bulletin to Public School Teachers Association," Ritchie Correspondence, 
Maryland Room, McKeldin Library, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland. 

50. Baltimore Sun, December 15, 1932. 

51. Ibid., November 29, 1932; January 16, 1933. 

52. Maryland, Secretary of State, Message of Governor Albert C. Ritchie to the General Assembly of 
Maryland of 1933 (Baltimore, 1933), pp. 28-31. 



200 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



pari-mutuel betting. Folks who couM afford to waste their money gambling 
might just as well let their winnings do some good, they thought. A strong county 
faction led by Senator J. Allan Coad of St. Mary's County felt that much fat 
Tt^maimd ©ft the -budget, and they were deterAiWd'tij'Mttf ft Off.*' 

Midway through the session Ritchie saw that opposition to the luxury tax was 
too strong. He decided to obtain as much of the money as possible through drastic 
economy m««sures within the state govetr»ii«it. The nieney thm saved wses to be 
combined with revenue from a 1 per cent pari-mutuel tax and receipts from 
motor vehicle license fees to form a pool yielding three million dollars for each of 
the fiscal yetm 1934 and WM. Baltimore City woald receive $1.5 million each 
year and the counties the same amount. All but $200,000 of Baltimore's share 
would be applied to payments for the bond issue. The rest would be used to lower 
the municipal tax rate. The counties' shjure would enable the state to lower the 
minimum school levy.''' 

The revised program and the bill authorizing the bond issue to finance 
unemployment relief expenditures in Baltimore passed the legislature during the 
busy closing days of the session. When the relief bond issue bill was first proposed 
in January the amount to be raised was set at $8 million. By April 3, when the bill 
passed the House, estimates of the year's relief expenditures had increased so 
much that the amount of the bond issue had to be increased to $12 million.'' 

During the winter of 1932-33 the relief rolls continued to grow. Baltimore had 
18,250 families on relief in September; by January 2,500 more had been added. 
Twenty per cent of Baltimore's workers were unemployed in January of 1933; 11 
per cent of the city's residents were on relief. Moreover, the families on relief were 
able to contribute less to their own upkeep than before and were requiring more 
help per family." 

Relief workers in the counties were facing the same problems that Baltimore 
relief workers had faced the preceding winter. In March, 5.2 per cent of the 
families in the counties were on the relief rolls. Over the winter a much higher 
percentage had been aided at one time or another. Queen Anne's County had 73 
families on relief in March, but 106 different families had required aid over a 
period of three months. Harford County reported 158 families on relief in March, 
but over 500 families had received some kind of assistance since the beginning of 
November. The number of families on the relief rolls was much larger than in the 
previous winter. Somerset County had 89 families on relief in February of 1932; a 
year later it had 625. In Worcester County the increase was from 61 to 642. In 
Allegany County, where unemployment had long been a serious problem, the 
number of people on relief increased by 60 per cent over the winter." 

In August of 1932 Governor Ritchie had appointed a Governor's Advisory 
Committee on Unemployment to gather information about the relief problem in 



53. Baltimore Sun, January 26, 1933; January 30, 1933. 

54. Ibid., February 25, 1933. 

55. Ibid., April 4, 1933. 

56. "CWA Activities in Maryland," pp. 26, 35 

57. Anita J. Faatz to Albert C. Ritchie, March 10, 1933, Box 8006 (10), Ritchie Executive 
Papers. 



The Depression in Maryland 



201 



the counties and recommend a course of action for the state to follow regarding it. 
In January of 1933 the committee received a letter from Dr. J. H. Janney, the 
Chairman of the Anne Arundel County Central Relief Committee. Dr. Janney 
had noted that newspaper reports indicated the Ritchie administration thought 
Maryland was taking care of its relief problems adequately. He wrote to the 
committee, he said, to inform them that such was not the case in Anne Arundel 
County. Inadequate relief was being given in a majority of cases, wit^ relief 
families receiving "starvation" rations. Better rations could not be given, Dr. 
Janney explained, because the relief organizations did not have enough money to 
do so. Conditions in the northern part of the county were so bad. Dr. Janney 
thought, that it looked as if in some instances relief would become "almost 
permanent in character." In his opinion, Dr. Janney concluded, both additional 
county aid and state aid were needed.*' 

Anita Faatz, the Director of Welfare of the Board of State Aid and Charities, 
had visited the counties gathering information for the Governor's Advisory 
Committee on Unemployment Relief. She had become very upset over the 
deteriorating conditions. On March 10 she wrote a letter to Ritchie describing the 
relief situation in the counties and expressing her concern. She concluded by 
saying that she thought the counties could make it through the winter, but that 
"we need and need urgently, State leadership, State planning, and [State] 
financial resources if people are to be cared for next winter. "'° 

Ten days later the Governor's Advisory Committee on Unemployment Relief 
forwarded its report to Ritchie. The committee pointed out that much of the 
traditional thinking about relief was no longer applicable in the conditions that 
now existed. The feeling had been quite general in the counties that the people 
who required relief were "the low standard white people, the Negroes, and the 
poor who 'are always with us.' " The aid that had traditionally been given was 
scaled to the "worthiness" of the chronic poor. It consisted mostly of food and was 
given as sparingly as possible. The people who now required relief, however, were 
people who had never needed assistance before, the committee pointed out. They 
constituted a group of "new poor" and necessitated the development of new 
attitudes about relief. When the number of families on relief approached 10 per 
cent of the state population, the committee declared, the issue was no longer one 
of serving the poor in merciful kindness. Unemployment and inadequate 
income meant people who were unable to pay for necessities such as medical 
care, it meant families breaking up under strain. The problem facing the state 
therefore was "one of the conservation of the human values and social elements 
involved for the protection of the state."*" 

The crux of the problem, the committee thought, was financial resources. State 
income was tied to deflating property values, but the federal government 
possessed a much more flexible taxing power. The momentum of the federal 
government joining hands with the state governments was inescapable, the 



58. Dr. J. H. Janney to Harry Greenstein, January 31, 1933, ibid. 

59. Faatz to Ritchie. 

60. "Report and Recommendations of Advisory Committee on Unemployment Relief," March 20, 
1933, ibid., pp. 1-3. 



202 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



committee asserted. It warned that the state that did not join hands with the 
federal government would find itself losing out in two ways: first, through the 
taxes its citizens would have to pay to provide federal relief for other states, and 
seeond, through its own inability to support an wAequate relief program. The 
committee recommended that machinery be set up through which federal and 
state funds could be joined with local resources under state leadership.*^ 

A wi!»k lat^ Governor Ritchie released a stfttement saying that he was 
prepared to ask the Reconstruction Finance Corporation for a loan to relieve 
distress in the counties. Ritchie explained that information he had received from 
Mm Faatz and his advisory eenamittec ifaewed tiiat conditions in the counties 
had reached the point where outsi«ie assistance to the counties became necessary. 
He added that he had also been invested by rumors that the states would not be 
required to pay back the RFC loans. He imd decided, he said, that it would be 
foolish for Maryland to take care of its own rtlief problems if other states were to 
benefit from federal funds without penalty.*^ 

The decision to turn to the federal government for assistance in handling the 
relief problem was one that Governor Ritchie made with great reluctance. At 
both the state and local levels Maryland's governmental officials waited until the 
failure of private charity forced them to act before they took any effective steps to 
deal with the relief problem. Their hesitancy was due in part to a conviction that 
such matters were best handled by private charity and in part to budgetary 
problems resulting from a dedme in governmental revenues. But it also seems to 
have been due in part to a tendency to place a higher priority on achieving a 
balanced budget than on providing assistance to the suffering unemployed. 
Govrarnor Ritchie, along with many other Maryland officials, at first voiced 
strong opposition to federal initiatives in dealing with the relief problem, basing 
his opposition on the familiar states' rights argument. Ironically, within two 
years after Ritchie decided to ask for federal aid the federal government was 
threatening to terminate that aid if Maryland did not assume a larger share of its 
own relief expenditures.** 



61. Ibid., p. 3. 

62. Baltimore Sun, March 29, 1933. 

63. Ibid., March 14, 1935. 



SIDELIGHT 



Black Society 

And the Economics of Slavery 

ALLAN KULIKOFF* 



Three new works, each the result of years of research and analysis, 
are creating a new social, economic, and demographic history of black people 
in the ante-bellum South.' Fogel and Engerman's Time on the Cross, the 
first to appear, was instantly controversial.^ Their book provoked debate for two 
reasons. First, they reported the findings of ten years of research into the history 
of slavery by cliometricians and presented these conclusions in clear language. 
The validity of their data, and the way they used the data to support their 
findings, have been subject to much criticism.* Secondly, the authors examined 
slave conditions and black society and concluded that slave life was more secure 
and stable than previously documented by historians. This review will analyze 
Fogel and Engerman's description of slave society and suggest how a different 
approach to their data modifies their conclusions. 

Fogel and Engerman were led to study black society by their findings about 
ante-bellum cotton economy. Theee conclusions can be briefly summarized. The 
South before the Civil War was neither lazy nor unproductive. Slavery was a 



Mr. Allan Kulikoff is a fellow at the Institute of Early American History and Culture for the 
1975-1977 term. 

* A number of scholars commented upon, and improved earlier versions of this essay. I would like to 
thank Linda Bissell, David Bohmer, John B. Boles, Lois Carr, Herbert Gutman, P. M. G. Harris, 
Edward Kopf, Russell Menard, Elizabeth Pleck, and Lorena Walsh for their incisive criticisms. 

1. Robert William Fogel and Stanley L. Engerman, Time on the Cross: The Economics of American 
Negro Slavery, Volume 1, and Time on the Cross: Evidence and Methods, Volume 2 (Boston, 1974); 
Eugene D. Genovese, i?o// Jordan, Roll: The World the Slaves Made (New York, 1974); imd iMbert 
Gutman's two-volume study of slave and free black family life (fall 1975 publication). 

2. Mr. Fogel appeared on the NBC Today show, and two conferences were held in October and 
November 1974 on Time on the Cross. The book received substantial coverage in non-academic 
publications. For example, see reviews by C. Vann Woodward, New York Review of Books, 21 (May 2, 
1974) and by Eugene Genovese, Washington Post Book World, May 26, 1974, and a long article on the 
Rochester conference on the book by Joel Dreyfuss, Washington Post, November 3, 1974. 

3. Critical reviews of their statistics and economic methods may be found in essays by Thomas 
Haskell,. iVeu) York Review of Books, 21 (September 21, 1974): 38-42; by Allan J. Lichtman in The 
New Republic, 171 (July 6-13, 1974): 22-24; and especially the long essay by Paul David and Peter 
Temin in the Journal of Economic History, 34 (1974): 739-83. 

4. The best analysis of Fogel and Engerman's data and conclusions about Afro-American slave 
society is Herbert Gutman's "The World Two Cliometricians Made: A Review-Essay of F -i- E = 
T/C," Journal of Negro History, 60 (January 1975): 53-227. 

203 

Maryland Historical Magazine 
Vol. 70, No. 2, Summer 1975 



204 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



jM"ofitable institution, and returns on slave labor equaled those on industrial 
investments in the North. Sc^ut^frji |griculture, they insist, was the most 
efficient in the nation because cJ ecc^imiee of scale and "assembly line" 
production gangs on large cotton plantations. Per capita income in the 
South — including slaves as participants — exceeded in 1860 only by Austra- 
lia, the northeastern United States, and Great Britain. Between 1840 and 1860, 
per capita income grew faster in the South than in the North. 

The authors included materials on slave society "to strike down the view that 
black Americans were without culture, without achievement, and without 
development for their first two hundred and fifty years on American soil." Black 
men and women were efficient workers whose efforts led to growing southern 
wealth and prosperity in the ante-bellum period. Slaves worked in gangs and 
were often led by black drivers. Field hands produced large cotton crops, grew 
corn and vegetables, tended livestock, and repaired plantation structures. Slaves 
could earn extra money or receive rewards for work performed on their "own" 
time, and men who performed well were trained for more prestigious positions as 
artisans or drivers. In 1850 one-fourth of male slaves and a fifth of female slaves 
oh cotton plantations were overseers, drivers, skilled craftsmen, or personal 
servants. 

Although to increase their profits most masters exploited their slaves, they 
realized relatively contented slaves performed better. Consequently masters 
encouraged slaves to live in nuclear families, rarely sexually abused their female 
slaves (and insisted that white overseers keep away from them), sufficiently fed 
and clothed their charges, and only infrequently whipped them. 

How adequately are these assertions documented? Fogel and Engerman place 
their data on slave society into an economic context which provides only a partial 
picture of ante-bellum Afro-American society. There are two important concep- 
tual problems in the way the book treats slave society. Unlike several recent 
historians,' Fogel and Engerman see blacks almost exclusively from the vantage 
point of the masters and ignore Afro-American culture and religious life. 
Secondly, they are remarkably insensitive to temporal and geographical varia- 
tions in slave life and treatment. As a result of both of these problems together, 
the authors both underestimate black achievements and exaggerate the stability 
of slave social and family life. 

Slaves lived in two worlds. At work, they had to appear to obey their masters 
and had to hide their semi-independent life in their quarters. At home, black folk 
created their own society. Fogel and Engerman see only the world of the masters. 
For example, they imply that a slave's status was determined by the occupation 
his master chose for him. Whites probably ranked their slaves by occupation, but 
a black person's position in Afro-American society was probably based upon 



5. Besides Gutman's and Genovese's works cited in note 1, see Gerald W. Mullin, Flight and 
Rebellion: Slave Resistance in Eighteenth-Century Virginia (New York, 1972); Peter H. Wood, Black 
Majority: Negroes in Colonial South Carolina from 1670 through the Stono Rebellion (New York, 
1974); John W. Blassingame, The Slave Community: Plantation Life in the Ante-Bellum South (New 
York, 1972); George P. Rawick, From Sundown to Sunup: The Making of the Black Community 
(Westport, New York, 1972). 



Black Society 



205 



more than occupation; status in black slave society was probably determined by 
occupation, age, sex, place in family and kinship networks, and the role played in 
the community's religious life. The importance of slave culture to arguments 
made In Time on the Cross will become cleffl-er after a discussion of slave family 
life, and I will return to it at the end of the essay. 

Historians of slavery have traditionally stressed the ante-bellum period and 
have often treated the institution as if it were static. Even though new works by 
Mullin and Wood suggest that the conception of change over time is becoming 
critical to students of Afro-American life, Fogel and Engerman narrowed the 
traditional period of study. Almost all of their data is from the period between 
1850 and I860,* but they do not explicitly limit their conclusions to that time. 
Even when they collected serial data, useable time series that would indicate 
stability or change over time are not presented.' 

The nearly static picture of slave life between 1850 and 1860 distorts slave 
experiences in two ways. In the first place, slave society was probably different in 
1800 or 1750 or 1830 than in 1850. Secondly, slave society was an organism that 
changed from generation to generation and changed from time to time in the life 
cycle of an individual. At different times in their lives slaves were children and 
parents, field hands or artisans, and persisters or migrants. The occupation and 
status of a slave varied with his age and generation. The social life of a slave born 
in 1800 may have differed greatly from that of his child born in 1825 or his 
grandchild born in 1850. More slaves of one generation than another may have 
been separated from their families, had an opportunity to perform skilled labor, 
lived their entire lives with their kinfolk and friends, or procured their freedom. 
Fogel and Engerman do not examine possible secular or generational changes in 
slave society. 

One can best understand the conceptual problems of Time on the Cross by a 
detailed analysis of one set of findings. Fogel and Engerman 's discussion of slave 
family structure provides an example. In the pages that follow, I will report their 
findings on black family life and then place their data into the context of 
generational change. Since important changes occurred in black family structure 
before 1800, I will add details from recent research on slave families in colonial 
Maryland. 

Black families in the ante-bellum period, accordiffg to Fogel and Engerman, 

were strong, nuclear, and stable like those of their white masters. Black men 
headed patriarchial families, lived in their own cabins with their families, and 
received rations of food and clothing from the master for their wives and children . 
Children often stayed with both parents until they married. Black women in their 
late teens and early twenties married men in their mid twenties, and they were 



6. Miuiy of Fogel and Engerman's equations can be computed from statistics found only in the 1850 
and ISiO censuses, but earlier plantation and prdbate recfords contain demographic, occupational, 
price, and production data. Fogel and Engerman have collected masses of this material, but have OKly 
begun to analyze it. 

7. For example, Fogel and Engerman could have produced a time series on age at first birth of slave 
women from the probate sources they used. The time series of net interstate migration they present 
cannot be understood unless the pece^mtafe of mqfuaiits <tf thetotal slave populatfen in each period is 
given. Fogel and Engerman do not provide this data. See table 1 for such an analysis. 



206 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



usually chaste at marriage. Few black families were fragmented by the sale of 
family members or internally destroyed by the rape of black women. Most slave 
migrants traveled with their children and their masters to new homes in the 
Southwest. 

Fogel and Engerman present three pieces of evidence to support their 
conclusion that Afro-American families were stable: the age of slave women at 
the birth of their first child, the number of mulattoes in the South, and the rate of 
net interstate geographic migration of slaves from 1790 to 1860. The first two are 
very ambiguous indicators of the stability of slave families and can be analyzed 
briefly. However, geographic movement had a great impact on black family life, 
and Fogel and Engerman present a useful time series of interstate migration. 

The age of slave women at the birth of their first child is used by Fogel and 
Engerman to deny that black women and teenagers were promiscuous. Since the 
mean age of mothers at their first births was 22.5 and 60 percent occurred after 
the mother reached age twenty, Fogel and Engerman conclude that slave women 
waited until marriage to begin having intercourse and that "slave parents closely 
guarded their daughters from sexual contact with men." To base conclusions 
about sexual mores on an age at first birth is a great jump in logic. Promiscuity is 
not a function of age; the nature of sexual activity is determined by the 
relationship between the participants rather than their ages. A married fifteen- 
year-old slave woman could in good conscience have intercourse with her 
husband, but her twenty-five-year-old sister who flitted from man to man was 
promiscuous. 

Fogel and Engerman insist that white sexual exploitation of black women was 
not common enough to undermine black families, and use the small percentage of 
mulattoes in the slave population to support this assertion. Only 7.7 percent of all 
slaves were mulattoes in 1850 and 10.4 percent in 1860. Using a complex genetic 
formula, the authors found that only between 1 and 2 percent of all slave children 
on ahte-bellum plantations had white fathers. This data is three times removed 
from the conclusions based upon it. Only a few rapes of black women would 
create a great deal of fear in the slave community. The number of sexual acts 
gives no clue to the quality of the activity: miscegenation could be an act between 
rapist and victim, between lovers, or between common-law husband and wife. 
Finally, the number of mulatto children is not a measure of the number of 
interracial sexual ccoitacts. Sexual activity is measured by an event that might or 
might not occur nine months later; women were not at risk to conceive a child 
when already pregnant, when nursing a child, or at times outside their period. 

The number of slave families separated by long distance migration is 
potentially a very useful indicator nf the stability of black families. Fogel and 
Engerman maintain that interstate migration from east to west displaced few 
slave fainili^. A net total of about 835,000 slave* went from the older, eastern 
states to newer cotton lands in the west from 1790 to 1860. Only about 16 percent 
of them (127,000) were sold from 1810 to 1860; the rest traveled with their 
masters. ChiMren were rarely sold. Only 9.3 percent of all slaves sold in New 
Orleans from 1804 to 1862 were children under thirteen, and 65 percent were 
young and mostly unmarried slaves between thirteen and twenty -four. Children 



Black Society 



207 



who migrated usually traveled with their parents and the master. Slave 
marriages were only infrequently broken. About 5.8 percent of all slave marriages 
were ended by slave sales both within and between states, and a further 2.8 
percent were broken by estate imsions. The vast majority of marriages, they 
insist, were broken by the death of one of the partners. 

The impact of migration on slave families is greatly underestimated in Time on 
the Cross. Fogel and Engerman's conception of the family is very narrow and the 
statistics they present exclude many migrants. They include only husband, wife, 
and children under thirteen in slave families. The sale of a twenty-year-old man 
from Virginia to Alabama and his sei»rati(Mi frohi his parents and siblings did 
not, according to their definition, split a slave family. Net interstate migration 
excludes much geographic movement. Many slave families were split by local 
sales, gifts and bequests to children by masters, and other intrastate transfers of 
slaves. Fialhermore, reciprocal interstate transfers were not included. If 1000 
slaves were sold from Virgiiiia to Maryland and 1000 slaves were sold from 
Maryland to Virginia, these sales would not be in the Statistics. 

Fogel and Engerman's data on geographic movement of slaves and recent 
research on colonial slavery permit an analysis of the effects of migration on 
black family stability. Tables 1 and 2 summarize and extend Fogel and 
Engerman's statistics. It must be emphasized that the statistics found in the 
tables are very rough estimates and must be treated with caution. They do 
permit one to make a plausible argument about the changing numbers of 
migrants from 1790 to I860.' 

Recent research indicates that it took several generations for Africans and their 
children to develop stable family life in colonial North America. More men than 
women were imported from Africa and black households often included only 
mothers and their children; as a result, many men could not belong to any slave 
family. By 1750 the sex ratio declined to near equality, and nearly every native 
slave was a member of a large extended family. While some slaves were forced to 
migrate to frontier areas, a large proportion of Afro-American slaves of the 
pre-Revolutionary generation stayed their entire lives in the neighborhood of 
their birth. These slaves developed extensive kinship networks with their 
parents, children, and other relatives. Many black men did not live on the same 
plantation as their wives in the eighteenth century, and the responsibility for 
daily child nurture fell on their wives. On large plantations, the mother and her 
children were surrounded by the mother's sisters, brothers, nieces, nephews, 
cousins, parents, uncles, and aunts. These blood kin provided companionship 



8. All the statistics in the two tables are based upon Fogel and Engerman's time series of net 
interstate migration. The survivor method used in calculating the series may not be totally reliable. 
They had to estimate survival rates (from life tables), total immigration, and age structures. To 
calculate their statistics, they assumed that vital rates for slaves were the same over the entire 
country, and then determined how many slaves should have lived in each state if no migration had 
occurred. Any one of these assumptions might be incorrect. The series on intrastate migration (found 
in table 1) is based upon slave sales from a single state (Maryland) during one ten year period 
(1830-1840) which may or may not be typical of national trends over a longer time. For the survivor 
method, see Time on the Cross, 2:42-48, and for more detailed comments on the statistics I 
calculated, see the notes to tables 1 and 2. 



208 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



TABLE 1 

Migrations of Blacks in the United States, 1790-1860" 



Pwiod 


Interstat 
Number 


J Migrants 
Percentage' 


Percentage 
Intrastate 
Migrants' 


Percentage 

Foreign 
Immigrants 


Percentage All 
Migrants And 
Immigrants 


1790-1800 


17,000 


2 


4 


10 


16 


1800-1810 


31,000 


3 


5 


9 


17 


1810-1820 


101,000 


7 


13 


1 


20 


1820-1830 


121,000 


6 


12 


1 


18 


1830-1840 


223,000 


9 


18 


*a 


27 


1840-1850 


149,000 


5 


9 


*ii 


14 


1850-1860 


193,000 


5 


10 




14 



a. Sources: Column 2, Time on the Cross, 1:46; columns 3, 4, see below; column 5, Time on the Cross 
1:25— immigration figures found there (90,000, 1790-1800; 105,000, 1800-1810; 10,000, other five pe- 
riods) are divided by the total slave population at the end of the period found in Historical Statistics 
o/ the United States, Colonial Times to 1957 (Washington, 1960), Series A, 95-122, pp. 11-12; col- 
umn 6, total of columns 3, 4, and 5 minus tlie probrfbffity that inrtrastate nrigiant^ also were Biter9t«te 
migrants (interstate x interstate). 

b. This percentage is a weighted average by age of migrants. The migrants' age structure is found in 
Time on the Cross, 1:50; general age structures are found in Jack E. Eblen, "New Estimates of the 
Vital Rates of the United States Black Population During the Nineteenth Century," Demography, 
11 (1974): 305-306, 309. For the biases and computation of the figures write directly to the author. 

c. The figures were based upon data collected for Maryland between 1830 and 1840. See William 
Criderhead, "How Extensive Was the Border State Slave Trade? A New Look," Civil War History, 18 
(1972): 51,and Time on the Cross, 2:115. Write the author directly for computation procedure. 

d. Less than one-half a percent. 

between visits from the husband and father. Complex social networks among 
slaves on neighboring plantations developed as masters gave slaves to their 
children, and as slave men married women from nearby plantations. Long 
distance migration deprived the migrant of the support and comfort his extended 
family had given him.* 

Black migration during the nineteenth century disrupted slave social life 
more than similar migrations among whites. White migrants freely left their 
homes in search of a better life. They could easily visit or write kinfolk left at 
their old homes. White migrants found numerous social institutions at their 
destinations that provided them with social and personal identity. They could 
choose among churches, political parties, towns, general stores, farm groups, and 
voluntary societies of many varieties. Blacks were more adversely affected by 
migration. Their movements were involuntary and they usually could not 
communicate with kinfolk left behind. Only black churches awaited slave 
migrants at their destinations. Almost every slave who migrated beyond easy 
visiting range was separated from some member of his extended family, and 
those left behind were also hurt by the experience. 

9. Ri«sell R. Menard, "A ProfQe of the Maryland Slave Population, 1658-1730: A Demographic 
Study of Blacks in Four Counties," William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 32 (January 1975): 29-54; 
and Allan Kulikoff, "Tobacco County: Population, Economy and Society in Eighteenth Century 
Prince George's County, Maryland," chap. 10 (Ph.D. dissertation, Brandeis University, forthcoming). 
See Wood, Black Majority, chap. 5, for somewhat different developments in South Carolina. 



Black Society 



209 



Tables 1 and 2 suggest the dimensions of the geographic movements of slaves 
between 1790 and 1860; table 1 presents data on movements between each decade 
and table 2 analyzes geographic mobility of generations of slaves over their entire 
lives. Three general conclusions can be drawn from the tables: There was a great 
variation in the extent of migration from decade to decade and from generation to 
generation. Nearly every adult slave born between 1790 and 1830 was either 
forced to migrate a long distance from his birthplace or knew close kinfolk who 
left the neighborhood and lived far away." However, kinship networks were 
maintained and extended throughout the century because at least 40 percent of 
every generation of slaves stayed their entire lives near their childhood homes. 

In general, the rate of migration increased from 1790 to 1840, and then declined 
in the twenty years before the Civil War. Less than a tenth of all Afro-Americans 
probably migrated long distances during the early national period, and slaves 
born before 1790 were less likely to move from their birthplaces than their 
children or grandchildren. Nevertheless, nearly 200,000 Africans entered the 
country and most probably went to newly settled areas of South Carolina and 
Georgia. The family lives of these new slaves was disrupted, and they had to learn 
to live in a strange Afro-American environment. Afro- Americans had to find 
places for Africans in their long-established family networks. Immigration 
declined after 1810 to a trickle, but internal migration increased as areas of the 
new Southwest were opened to cotton cultivation. More native families were 
probably separated between 1810 and 1840 than either before or after that time; 
slaves born between 1800 and 1820 were the generation most affected by internal 
migration throughout their lives. Migration must have been very unsettling for 
these slaves. Over half were forced to leave their homes; if each left behind only 
one (different) spouse, sibling, cousin, aunt, or uncle, then virtually every adult 
of their generation would have been adversely affected by geographic mobility. 
Internal movements declined in the 1840s and 1850s, and Afro-Americans born 
after 1830 left home at a slower pace. As a result, extensive, three-generation 
kinship networks probably emerged on newer cotton plantations in the south- 
west. 

The major problem with Fogel and Engerman's description of Afro-American 
society is not their manipulation of data but their conceptual framework. For 
example, they placed materials on slave families into a chapter on exploitation 
and asked how slave families were exploited by masters. One might more 
profitably begin with the cultural context of family life, and ask different 



10. I have attempted to determine the proportion of slaves affected by split marriageB Mid the 
numbers of kinfolk left behind, but the results were too speculative to publish. If one assumed that 
eaoh mifprant left two kinfolk behind and that the numbers of husbands and wives separated was 
propoi]:ional to their strength in the mobile population, and added these two figures to the percentage 
of migrants, the prop^i<m of the slave populatiem affected m eaeh decade reee tiom about a fifth in 
1790-1800 to over three-quarters in 1830-1840 ftrai>#ien ieelkied te «bout feur-^ths by 1850-1800. 
When the same procedure was applied to table two, the total percentage affected rose from about half 
in the 1771-1782 birth cohort to 100 percent by the 1801-1812 cohort and remained that high 
thereafter. Since many of the same people were affected by migration more than once (and are 
therefore counted twice in the estimates), the estimates cited in this note should be somewhat re- 
duced. 



210 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



TABLE 2 

Ntl''&«'MBTATiE MID ESTIMATED INTRASTATE MIGRATION OF SLAVES, BY BiRTH COHORTS, 1771-1842* 



Birth 
Cohort 


Percentage Interstate 
M%rants By Age Groups 


Total 
Percentfige 
Interstate 


Total Percent- 
age Interstate 

nun 

Eistimated 




0-12 


13-24 


25-50 


Migrants 


Intrastate 
Migrants 


1772-1782 


1" 


3 


2 


6 


17 


1783-1793 


2 


4 


5 


10 


29 


1793-1803 


3 


10 


5 


16 


44 


1803-1813 


7 


9 


7 


21 


58 


1813-1823 


7 


13 


4 


22 


60 


1823-1833 


10 


7 


3 


18 


51 


1833-1843 


5 


7 


1 


13 


36 



a. Each column is a measure of the number of migrants in the group divided by the population at 
risk to migrate in the group. The percentage of migrants in each age group in each census was deter- 
mined, and then each cohort was followed through each census. Sources: Time on the Cross, 1: 46; 
Eblen, "New Estimates," 305-306. Write to the mithcr for computation of the statistics. 

b. Roughly estimated. 



questions: what was the cultural and social role of Afro-American families under 
slavery? What events would disrupt these functions? How frequently did those 
events occur? One can speculate on the answers to these questions on the basis of 
recent research in the area. Slave families provided Afro-Americans with a social- 
identity apart from that given them by their masters, and the children, parents, 
cousins, brothers, sisters, aunts, and uncles who belonged to the family network 
became the focus of slave social events. Cultural norms were passed from 
generation to generation by the extended family. When members of a family 
network were forcibly removed, the rest of the family continued to function as a 
unit. Tliese networks survived slavery and even migration to northern cities after 
the Civil War.'' Because they lacked a cultural context, Fogel and Engerman did 
not fully understand either the impact of migration on slave families or the 
achievements of slave families under great adversity. 

Despite its limitations, Time on the Cross is an important addition to the 
literature on ante-bellum slavery. The general public learned, and to a degree 
shared, the excitement felt by working social and economic historians. More 
importantly, the book presents evidence on many topics and implicitly suggests 
new directions for the study of slavery. Since their analysis is still incomplete, the 
writers insist that their conclusions are tentative. One hopes the sustained 
criticism the book has received will lead to a greatly improved second edition. 

11. See Elizabeth Pleck, "Black Migration to Boston in the Late-Nineteenth Century," (Ph.D. 
dissertation, Brandeis, 1973), passim, but esp. chap. 1. 



Notes on Maryland Historical Society 



A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF ARTICLES AND BOOKS 
ON MARYLAND HISTORY, 1974* 

RICHARD J. COX 



\^RY FEW BIBLIOGRAPHIES HAVE BEEN COMPILED ON MARYLAND HISTORY. FOR 

several years in the early 1950s the Maryland Historical Magazine published an 
annual bibliography. Last year the same journal had a bibliography of articles on 
Maryland history. Other than these and some specialized bibliographies (such as 
Paul H. Giddens' "Bibliography on Maryland During the Time of Governor 
Horatio Sharpe, 1753-1769," Maryland Historical Magazine 31 [March 1936]: 
6-16) this area of research has been neglected. 

The following bibliography is the first of what is to be an annual bibliography. 
Selection was based on articles and books primarily about Marylasd, Both 
popular and scholarly publications have been included. There are numerous 
works about the South or other broader topics that include Maryland, but it 
would not be possible to include everything. For those interested in such 
publications the regular bibliographies in the American Historical Review and 
especially the Journal of Southern History will be most helpful. 

General and Unclassifled (arranged alphabetically) 

Brown, Dorothy M. and Duncan, Richard R. "A Selected Bibliography of Articles 
in Maryland History in Other Journals." Maryland Historical Magazine 69 
(Fall 1974):300-16. 

Finlayson, Ann. Colonial Maryland. New York: Thomas Nelson, Inc., 1974. 
[Juvenile] 

Snell, Tee Loftin. "Lords Brethen and Lords Calvert 1625-1647." In The Wild 
Shores: America's Beginnings, pp. 117-35. Washington D.C.: National Geo- 
graphic Society, 1974. 

The Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone Company of Maryland. The Telephone 
in Maryland. Baltimore, 1974. 

"The Volunteer Tradition." History Trails 9 (Autumn 1974): 1-8. [Volunteer 
Firemen ] 



*The following people were of inestimable aid in this project: the Library staff of the Maryland 
Historical Society including Hester Rich, Susan Knight, and Mary K. Meyer; Mr. P. William Filby, 
Director of the Society; and Dr. Edward C. Papenfuse, State Archivist, Hall of Records. 

211 

Maryland Historical Magazine 
Vol. 70, No. 2, Summer, 1975 



212 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



Archaeology, Architecture, and Art (arranged chronologically) 

Stone, Garry Wheeler. "St. John's: Archaeological Questions and Answers." 
Maryland Historical Magazine W (Smmmei 1974): 1^-68. 

Carson, Gary. "The 'Virginia House' in Maryland." Maryland Historical 
Magazine 69 (Summer 1974): 185-96. 

Sirkis, Nancy; text by EUwood Parry. "Tidewater Towns and Southern Planta- 
tions." In Reflections of 1776: The Colonies Revisited, pp. 141-211. New York: 
Viking Press, 1974. 

"The Tidewater of 1776." Americana 2 (March 1974): 2-7. [This is a portion of 

the above work by Sirkis.] 
Henry, Helen. "Magnificence Preserved." Baltimore Sun Magazine, 2 June 

1974, pp. 12-19. [Brice House, Annapolis] 
Miller, George L. "A Tenant Farmer's Tableware: Nineteenth -Century Ceramics 

from Tabb's Purchase." Maryland Historical Magazine 69 (Summer 

1974): 197-210. 

Alexander, Robert L. The Architecture of Maxmilian Godefroy. Baltimore: Johns 

Hopkins University Press, 1974. 
Cosentino, Andrew J. "Charles Bird King: An Appreciation." American Art 

Journal 6 (May 1974):54-71. 
Iliff, Sally MacDonald. A Life All Its Own: The Mount Royal Station of the 

Maryland Institute, College of Art. Baltimore: Maryland Institute, College of 

Art, 1974. 

Johnston, William R. "William and Henry Walters: Collectors and Philanthro- 
pists." Walters Art Gallery Bulletin 27 (December 1974). 

. "American Paintings in the Walters Art Gallery." Antiques 106 

(November 1974):853-61. 

Randall, Richard H., Jr. "A Gallery for Alfred Jacob Miller." Antiques 106 
(November 1974):836-43. [Walters Art Gallery] 

Waesche, James F. "Baltimore Interview: Director of the Walters Art Gallery, 
Richard H. Randall, Jr." Baltimore 67 (November 1974):12ff. 

Washington County Museum of Fine Arts. Regional American Quilts and 
Coverlets: A Bicentennial Presentation. Hagerstown: Washington County 
Museum of Fine Arts, 1974. 

Archives and Library (arranged chronologically) 

Cox, Richard J. "Public Records in Colonial Maryland." American Archivist 

37 (April 1974):263-75. 
Starin, Mary Elizabeth. "The Callister Papers, Maryland Room, Talbot County 

Free Library, Easton, Maryland." Maryland and Delaware Genealogist 15 

(January 1974): 3-5. 

Brunk, Gerald R. and Lehman, James 0. A Guide to Select Revolutionary War 
Records Pertaining to Mennonites and Other Pacifist Groups in Southeastern 
Pennsylvania and Maryland, 1775-1800. 1974. 

Radoff, Morris L. "The Maryland Records in the Revolutionary War." American 
Archivist 37 (April 1974):277-85. 



Manuscript Notes 



213 



Cox, Richard J. "Two Marylanders in the Early Navy: Th6 Hambleton Family 
Papers, MS. 2021." Maryland Historical Magazine 69 (Fall 1974):317-21. 

Papenfuse, Edward C. "'A Modicum of Commitment': The Present and Future 
Importance of the Historical Records S«rvey." American Archivist 37 (April 
1974):211-21. 

Smith, Richard K., ed. The Hugh L. Dryden Papers 1898-1965: A Preliminary 
Catalogue of the Basic Collection. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, 1974. 

Cox, Richard J. "The Historical Development of the Manuscripts Division of the 
Maryland Historical Society." Maryland Historical Magazine 69 (Winter 
1974):409-17. 

. "A Description of the Vertical File." Maryland Historical Magazine 69 

(Spring 1974):86-90. [at the Maryland Historical Society] 
. "Opportunities for Maryland Medical History Research at the Maryland 

Historical Society." Maryland State Medical Journal 23 (June 1974) :56. 
Evans, Richard A. and Shallerup, Harry R. "The Nimitz Library, U.S. Naval 

Academy." Library Scene 3 (June 1974):4-7. 
Malloy, Mary Gordon and Sween, Jane. A Selective Guide to the Historic 

Records of Montgomery County, Maryland. Rockville: Montgomery County 

Department of Public Libraries, 1974. 
Parson, Richard, ed. Guide to Specialized Subject Collections in Maryland 

Libraries. 2d ed. Baltimore: Baltimore County Public Library, 1974. 

Biography (arranged alphabetically by subject's name) 

Ruckert, Robert J. "Jacob Brown's Legacy." Glades Star 4 (September 
1974):509-13. 

White, Frank F., Jr. "James Butcher: Maryland's Forgotten Acting Governor." 

Maryland and Delaware Genealogist 15 (January 1974) :6-8. 
Cox, Richard J. "George Calvert: The Man and His Motives." Baltimore Sun 

Magazine, 17 March 1974, pp. 10-15. 
Cleary, Adelaide Rogers. "John Hanson, Patriot." Daughters of the American 

Revolution Magazine 108 (October 1974):800-2. 
Jacob, Kathryn A. "Mr. Johns Hopkins" Johns Hopkins Magazine 25 (January 

1974):13-17. 

Street, Margaret M. "A Biography of the Late Ethel Johns, LL.D." Johns 
Hopkins Hospital School of Nursing Alumini Magazine 73 (July 1974):25-6. 

Carter, Samuel, IIL The Riddle of Dr. Mudd. New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 
1974. 

Zseleczky, James Waters. "Anne Mynne of Hertingfordbury, Wife of George 
Calvert, First Lord Baltimore (1579-1622)." Chronicles of St. Mary's 22 
(September 1974):397-99. 

Martin, Ralph G. The Woman He Loved: The Story of the Duke and Duchess of 
Windsor. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1974. 

Black and Indian (arranged chronologically) 

Kawashima, Yasuhide. "Indians and Southern Colonial Statutes." Indian 



I 



214 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



Historian 7 (Winter 1974): 10-16. 
Lewis, Ronald L. "Slavery on Chesapeake Iron Plantations Before the American 

Revolution." Journal of Negro History 50 {Mfy 1974) -.242-54. 
Silv^W-man, Albert J. ''ThrehesA^e*^ llll^^dr Ndt^a Stcrt^M Sun 

Magazine, 22 September 1974, pp. 30-31. 
Smith, W. Wayne. "A Marylander in Mrica: The Letters of Henry Hannon." 

Maryland Historical Magazine 69 (^ter lf74): 398-404. 
Van Deburg, William L. "Frederick Douglass: Maryland Slave to Religious 

Liberal." Maryland Historical Magazine 69 (Spring 1974):27-43. 
Thomas, Bettye C. "A Nineteenth Century Black Operated Shipyard, 

1866-1884: Reflections Upon Its Inception and Ownership." Journal of Negro 

History 59 (January 1974): 1-12. 
Taylor, Blaine, "The Afro- American's 'House of Murphy.' " Baltimore 67 (Decem- 
ber 1974):18ff. 

County (arranged alphabetically by county) 

Crapster, Basil L. "Land Holdings and Buildings in Present-Day Carroll 
County in 1798." Historical Society of Carroll County Newsletter 23 (Septem- 
ber 1974): [2-3]. 

Cecil County Maryland 1608-1850 As Seen By Some Visitors and Several Essays 

on Local History Collected bv G.E. Gifford, Jr. Rising Sun: George E. Gifford 

Memorial Committee, Calvert School, 1974. 
300th Anniversary Commemorative Booklet: Historical Sketches and Pictures of 

Cecil County, Maryland. Elkton: Cecil Whig Publishing Co., 1974. 
Compton, Amy. "Ferreting Out History in Charles County: A Mini-Tour for Cars 

or Bikes." Maryland 6 (Spring 1974):6-9. 
Newman, Parsons. Three Historical Sketches of Frederick County from its 

Foundations to the End of the Revolutionary Period. Frederick: Historical 

Society of Federick County, 1974. 

Economics (arranged chronologically) 

Clemens, Paul G. E. "The Settlement and Growth of Maryland's Eastern 
Shore During the English Restoration." Maryland Historian 5 (Fall 
1974):63-78. 

Hughes, Brent H. "How Colonists Beat the Currency Crunch." Maryland 7 

(Autumn 1974):14-17. 
Menard, Russell R.; Harris, P. M. G.; and Carr, Lois Green. "Opportunity and 

Inequality: The Distribution of Wealth on the Lower Western Shore of 

Maryland, 1638-1705." Maryland Historical Magazine 69 (Summer 

1974): 169-84. 

Browne, Gary L. "Business Innovation and Social Change: The Career of 
Alexander Brown After the War of 1812." Maryland Historical Magazine 69 
(Fall 1974): 243-55. 

Killick, John. "Risk, Specialization and Profit in the Mercantile Sector of the 
Nineteenth Century Cotton Trade: Alexander Brown and Sons 1820-80." 
Business History 16 (January 1974): 1-16. 



Manuscript Notes 



215 



Education and Literaiy (arranged chronologically) 

Haberland, Paul M. "The Reception of German Literature in Baltimore's 
Literary Ms^azines, 1800-1375." German-American Studies 7 (Spring 
l974):#-9i 

Phillips, Jesse C. "Powell's Run Academy." History Trails 8, no. 3 (1974):9-11. 
George, Christopher T. "A Poe Tour of Baltimore." Maryland 6 (Summer 
1974):24-8. 

Jacob, Kathryn A. "The Hopkins Four." Johns Hopkins Magazine 25 (July 
1974) ■.17-26. 

Calderwood, Paul T. "Community Schools of Garrett County." Glades Star 4 

(June 1974):494-500; (September 1974):515-20; (December 1974):540-46. 
Kelly, Frederic. "F. Scott Fitzgerald: His Baltimore Years." Baltimore Sun 

Magazine, 14 July 1974, pp. 14-25; 21 July 1974, pp. 10-15. 
Chamberlain, John. "The Young Mencken." Meckeniana: A Quarterly Review, 

no. 50 (Summer 1974) :6-8. 
Cheslock, Louis. "Some Personal Memories of H. L. M." Meckeniana: A 

Quarterly Review, No. 49 (Spring 1974):3~11. 
Hobson, Fred C, Jr. Serpent in Eden: H. L. Mencken and the South. Chapel 

Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1974. 
"Mencken's Baltimore." Baltimore Sunday Sun, 8 September 1974. [special 

40 -page supplement] 
Hallstead, William F. "Literary Maryland." Maryland 7 (Winter 1974):15-20. 
Jopp, Harold D. and Ingersoll, R. H., eds. Shoremen: An Anthology of Eastern 

Shore Prose and Verse. Cambridge: Tidewater Publishers, 1974. 

Genealogy (arranged alphabetically by author's name) 

"A List of Alienations and Transfers in St. Mary's County From the Sixth Day 
of June 1786 to the Seventh Day of March 1829." Chronicles of St. Mary's 22 
(February 1974):337-40; (March 1974):346-8; (April 1974):353-6; (June 
1974):378-80; (September 1974):402-4; (October 1974):405-12; (December 
1974):425-8. 

Armstrong, Zella, comp. Notable Southern Families. 3 vols, reprint. Baltimore: 

Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., 1974. 
"Baptismal and Birth Records First & St. Stephens United Church of Christ." 

Maryland Genealogical Society Bulletin 15 (August 1974): 123-37; (November 

1974): 240-49. 

"Baptismal and Birth Records St. Peter the Apostle Roman Catholic Church 
Baltimore, Maryland," Maryland Genealogical Society Bulletin 15 (November 

1974): 183-90. 

Barnes, Robert W. "Anne Arundel County, Maryland, Estate Proceedings, 
1788-1798." Maryland and Delaware Genealogist 15 (January 1974):16. 

. "Births Recorded in St. Paul's Parish Register (Baltimore Co.) Through 

nil." Maryland and Delaware Genealogist 15 (July 1974):58-59; (October 
1974) :83. 

. "Marriages in St. Paul's Parish, Kent bounty Maryland." Maryland 



216 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



Genealogical Society Bulletin 15 (February 1974): 10-15. 

. "Somerset Parish Records." Maryland Historical Magazine 69 (Winter 

1974):4l8-25. 

Bamett, Mrs. G. L. "Shipley-Bamett Bible Records." Maryland Genealogical 

Society Bulletin 15 (February 1974):22-29. 
Bate, Kerry William. "iTiofmas Durbin of Baltimore County, Maryland." 

Maryland and Delaware Genealogist 15 (July 1974) :56-57; (October 

1974):80-82. 

Bittinger, Wayne. Generations: A History of the Biddinger, Bidinger, Bittinger, 
& Bittner Families of Garrett County, Maryland. Parsons, West Virginia: 
McClain Printing Co., 1974. 

Brinkley, John J. "Register of the West River Meeting of the Religious Society of 
Friends (Quaker) on the Western Shore of Maryland." Maryland Genealogical 
Society Bulletin 15 (May 1974):98-103; (August 1974):119-22; (November 
1974):229-33. 

Burns, Annie Walker, comp. Maryland Account Book Number 33, 1752. reprint. 
Lutherville: Bettie Stirling Carothers, 1974. 

Captain Jeremiah Baker Chapter, Daughters of the American Revolution, comp. 
Cecil County, Maryland Marriage Licenses, 1777-1840. Baltimore: Genealogi- 
cal Publishing Co., 1974. 

Chance, Hilda. "Caroline County, Maryland, Tombstone Inscriptions." Mary- 
land and Delaware Genealogist 15 (January 1974):14-15; (July 1974):60-61. 

Clark, Raymond B., Jr. and Clark, Sara Seth; introduction by Mrs. Betty 
Worthington Briscoe. Calvert County, Maryland, Wills, 1654-1700. St. Micha- 
els: n.p., 1974. 

. "Carroll County, Maryland, Marriage Licenses." Maryland and Dela- 
ware Genealogist 15 (July 1974):54-55; (October 1974):78-79. 

Clark, Raymond B., Jr.; introduction by Edward S. Delaplaine. Frederick 
County, Maryland, Naturalizations, 1799-1850. St. Michaels: n.p., 1974. 

Coldham, Peter Wilson. English Convicts in Colonial America. Vol. I, Middlesex: 
1617-1775. New Orleans: Polyanthos, 1974. 

. "Genealogical Gleanings in England." National Genealogical Society 

Quarterly 62 (September 1974):199-212. 

"Connell Bible Records." Maryland Genealogical Society Bulletin 15 (August 
1974): 149-53. 

Cox, Richard J. "A New Source for Maryland Genealogy: John Thomas Scharf's 
Unpublished Biographical Dictionary of Maryland." Maryland Genealogical 
Society Bulletin 15 (August 1974):140-48. 

Dryden, Ruth T., comp. Somerset County Maryland 1850. El Cajon, California: 
n.p., 1974. 

Hamlin, John. The Spurriers in America. Williamstown, Massachusetts: n.p., 
1974. 

"Harford County, Maryland, Wills." Maryland and Delaware Genealogist 15 
(January 1974): 12-13. 

Harris, Mrs. Norris. "Dorsey Family Records." Maryland and Delaware Genealo- 
gist 15 (January 1974) :5. ' 



Manuscript Notes 



217 



. "Owens-Owings Family Records." Maryland and Delaware Genealogist 

15 (October 1974) :82. 
Hinds, Virginia Horner. Our Horner Ancestors: William of Fayette County, Pa. 

Son of Thomas of Baltimore C&unty, Md., fmmity 'Gertealogy Ca. 1700-1973. 

Chicago: Adams Press, 1974. 
Horsey, Eleanor F. Origins of Caroline County from Land Plats. Vol. I. Denton: 

n.p., 1974. 

Humphrey, Effingham P., Jr. "Gone West." Maryland Genealogical Society 

Bulletin 15 (May 1974):85-88. 
Hutchins, Ailene Williams. "Calvert County, Maryland, Gravestone Inscrip- 
tions." National Genealogical Society Quarterly 62 (September 1974):192-98. 
"Index to the 1850 Mortality Schedule, Cecil County, Maryland." Maryland 

Genealogical Society Bulletin 15 (August 1974): 154-56. 
Jarboe, Robert. A History of a Jarboe Family. Published by the author, 1974. 
Lester, Memory Aldridge, comp. Old Southern Bible Records: Transcriptions of 

Births, Deaths, and Marriages from Family Bibles, Chiefly of the 18th and 

19th Centuries. Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., 1974. 
McGee, Thomas D'Arcy. A History of the Irish Settlers in North America from 

the Earliest Period to the Census of 1850. Reprint. Baltimore: Genealogical 

Publishing Co., Inc., 1974. 
McMurry, Rhuy K. Williams. One Branch of Our Williams Family of Maryland 

and Kentucky. Published by the author, 1974. 
McVey, Charles A. "Regester Family Bible RecOTds." Maryland Genealogical 

Society Bulletin 15 (November 1974):236-39. 
Marshall, Nellie M. "Tombstone Records of Dorchester County, Maryland." 

Maryland and Delaware Genealogist 15 (January 1974):10-11; (July 

1974):52-53; (October 1974):76-77. 
Meyer, Mary K. "Captain John Fulford's Company February 13, 1776, to May 

21, 1777." Maryland Historical Magazine 69 (Spring 1974):93-97. 
. "Death Records from Richard Markland's Copy Book." Maryland 

Historical Magazine 69 (Fall 1974):323-26. 
. "Passenger Arrivals at the Port of Baltimore." Maryland Genealogical 

Society Bulletin 15 (February 1974):38-43. 
Morell, Louise Cox. Jamestown to Washington: Little Biographies of Twelve 

Generations from Beheathland to Cox, 1607-1950. Baltimore: Gateway Press, 

Inc., 1974. 

Morris, Philip. The Wadeing Place: A Study of Original Property Owners in 
Princess Anne, Maryland, 1733-1771. Princess Anne: Marylander and Herald, 
1974. 

Penniman, Thomas D. and Waring, Malcolm M. "Baltimore County, Mary- 
land, Land Grants." Maryland and Delaware Genealogist 15 (January 1974) :9. 

Scott, Kenneth, comp. Genealogical Abstracts from the American Weekly 
Mercury, 1719-1746. Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., 1974. 

Shingleton, Mrs. P. D. "Washington County, Maryland, Balance Books: 
Estates." Maryland and Delaware Genealogist 15 (January 1974):17; (July 
1974):63; (October 1974):85. 



218 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



Sfcc»das, Gust, ed.; introduction by Morris L. Radoff. The Early Settlers of 
Maryland; An Index to Names of Immigrants Compiled from Records of Land 
Patents, 1633-1680, in the Hall of Records, Annapolis, Maryland. Reprint. 
Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., 1974. 

Smith, Clifford Neal. Mercenaries from Ansbuch and Bayreuth, Germany, Who 
Remained in America After the Revolution. German-American Genealogical 
Research Monographs, no. 2. Thomson, Illinois: Heritage House, 1974. 

"Somerset County, Maryland — 1800 Census." Maryland Genealogical Society 
Bulletin 15 (August 1974) : 163-69; (November 1974):250-57. 

"Somerset County, Maryland, Tombstone Inscriptions." Maryland Genealogical 
Society Bulletin 15 (May 1974):67-73. 

"Talbot County Maryland 1800 Census," Maryland Genealogical Society Bul- 
letin 15 (February 1974): 1-9. 

"The Barlett and Orem Family Bible of Talbot County, Maryland." Maryland 
and Delaware Genealogist 15 (July 1974) :68. 

"The Downer Home." Kent Shoreman 9 (July 1974): 1-19. 

Tull, Willis Clayton, Jr. "Tombstone Inscriptions of St. Stephen's Church." 
Maryland Genealogical Society Bulletin 15 (February 1974):29-31. 

. "Worcester County, Maryland, Tombstone Inscriptions." Maryland and 

Delaware Genealogist 15 (January 1974):18; (July 1974):62; (October 1974) :84. 

Uhrbrock, Richard S. "Pilchers (Pilchards) and Reddens of Delmarva." Virginia 
Genealogist 18 (July-September 1974):187-95. 

"Vital Records of the First & St. Stephens United Church of Christ of Baltimore, 
Maryland." Maryland Genealogical Society Bulletin 15 (February 
1974):32-38; (May 1974): 104-12. 

Wilson, George B. "St. John's Parish Register Book." Maryland Genealogical 
Society Bulletin 15 (February 1974):44-55. 

Wilson, Woodrow T. Thirty Four Families of Old Somerset County, Maryland. 
Baltimore: Gateway Press, Inc., 1974. 

Wright, John Charles. Wright-Briscoe Pioneers. Arlington, Virginia: Wright- 
Briscoe, Publishers, 1974. 

Geography (arranged chronologically) 

Porter, Frank W., III. "Expanding the Domain: William Gooch and the 

Northern Neck Boundary Dispute." Maryland Historian 5 (Spring 1974) : 1-13. 
Morrison, Charles. An Outline of the Maryland Boundary Disputes and Related 

Events. Parsons, West Virginia: McClain Printing Co., 1974. 
Charmatz, Betty. "Geographical Perspectives in Poverty: A Baltimore Case 

Study." Letters & Papers in the Social Science: An Undergraduate Review 1 

(Spring 1974): 13-29. 

Legal (arranged chronologically) 

Yackel, Peter G. "Benefit of Clergy in Colonial Maryland." Maryland His- 
torical Magazine 69 (Winter 1974):383-97. 
Winitsky, Marvin Laurence. "Roger B. Taney: A Historiographical Inquiry." 



Manuscript Notes 



219 



Maryland Historical Magazine 69 (Spring 1974): 1-26. 
Rottier, Catherine M. "Ellen Spencer Mussey and the Washington College of 
Law." Maryland Historical Magazine 69 (Winter 1974):361-82. 

Maritime (arranged chronologically) 

"The Logs of Percy E. Budlong: Canoe Trips to Indian Head, Craney Island 
and Bretton Bay 1906-1907." Chronicles of St. Mary's 22 (May 1974):357-72; 
(June 1974):373-75. 

Burgess, Robert H. Chesapeake Sailing Craft- The Fifty-Year Period 1924-1974, 

Part One. Cambridge: Tidewater Publishers, 1974. 
Waesche, James F. "The Port That Built the City." Baltimore 67 (July):25-31. 

Medicine and Science (arranged chronologically) 

Carroll, Douglas. "Medical Students 1818 and 1834." Maryland State Medical 

Journal 23 (February 1974):37-42. 
. "A Botanist's Visit to Baltimore in 1835." Maryland State Medical 

Journal 23 (April 1974):49-55. 
"Famous 19th Century Astrraiomer Founder and Teacher at Sudlersville 

School." Kent Shoremen 9 (September 1974):31ff. [Simon Newcomb, 

1835-1909] 

Fitzsimons, Mrs. Neal. "The Audubon Naturalist Society and Its Home, 

Woodend" Montgomery County Story 17 (August 1974):1-11. 
Turner, Thomas B. "William Henry Welch, Medical Statesman for Hopkins." 

Johns Hopkim Magazine 25 {May 1974):29-33. 
. Heritage of Excellence: The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, 

1914-1947. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1974. 
Rosenwaike, Ira and Melton, Rdbtrt J. "Le^ Abortion and Fertility in 

Maryland, 1960-1971." Demography 11 (August 1974):377-95. 

Military (arranged chronologically) 

Batt, Richard J. "Maryland's 'Brave Fellows': A Reputation for Bravery is 

Won." Maryland 7 (Winter 1974):29-33. 
Cockey, Genevieve Frazer. "Minutemen of the Eastern Shore." Kent Shoreman 

9 (November 1974):47ff. 
Crandall, Gilbert. "The Bayonets of the Revolution: The First Maryland 

Brigade." Americana 1 (January 1974):11-15. 
McGrain, John W. "Defense Efforts at Dorsey's Forge." History Trails 8 

(Summer 1974): 13-16. 
Edward, Brother C. "The U.S.S. Constellation." American History Illustrated 9 

(April 1974): 12-25. 

Jenkins, Edmund E. "USF Constellation — A Ship of Destiny." Chesapeake Bay 

Magazine 4 (July 1974):6-9. 
McCauley, Robert H., Jr. "A U.S. Revenue Marine Officer's Uniform, ca 1855." 

Military Collector & Historian 26 (Spring 1974):21-23. 
Allen, Bob. "Point Lookout: Anderscfflvile North." Baltimore Sun Magazine, 28 



220 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



April 1974, pp. 18-23. 
iBfwuMtti, Jehu C. "Generafl Bradley T. JohflfSon's Plan to Abdtict Pr^ldent 
Lincoln." Chronicles of St. Mary's 22 (November 1974):4l3-20; (December 

1974):421-25. 

Politics (arranged chronologically) 

Papenfuse, Edward C; Jordan, David W.; Tilles, Carol P.; and Mc Williams, 

Jane W. Directory of Maryland Legislators 1635-1789. Annapolis: Maryland 

Bicentennial Commission, 1974. 
Carr, Lois Green and Jordan, David William. Maryland's Revolution of 

Government, 1689-1692. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1974. 
Gipe, George A. "A Moderator in Immoderate Times." Maryland 6 (Spring 

1974):26-29. [Sir Robert Eden] 
Hoffman, Ronald. "Maryland's Role in the Revolutionary War." Maryland 6 

(Spring 1974):25. 

Nash, Gary B. "Revolution on the Chesapeake." Reviews in American History 2 

(September 1974):373~78. 
Onuf, Peter S., ed. Maryland and the Empire, 1773: The Antilon-First Citizen 

Letters. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1974. 
Porter, Kent. "200 Years Ago, Maryland's Tea Party." Baltimore Sun Magazine, 

13 October 1974, pp. 36-37. 
Vivian, Jean H. "Thomas Stone and the Reorganization of the Maryland Council 

of Safety, 1776." Maryland Historical Magazine 69 (Fall 1974):271-78. 
Boles, John B. "Politics, Intrigue, and the Presidency: James McHenry to Bishop 

John Carroll, May 16, 1800." Maryland Historical Magazine 69 (Spring 

1974):64-85. 

Evitts, William J. A Matter of Allegiances: Maryland From 1850 to 1861. 

Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1974. 
"Please Tell Me What Is There of the Maryland Matter?" Lincoln Lore no. 1638 

(August 1974). 

Azzaretto, John F. A Study of Local Government Organization: Calvert County, 
Maryland. College Park: Maryland Technical Advisory Service, Bureau of 
Governmental Research, University of Maryland, 1974. 

Bard, Harry. Maryland State and Government: Its New Dynamics. Cambridge: 
Tidewater Publishers, 1974. 

Skok, James E. "Participation in Decision Making: The Bureaucracy and the 
Community." Western Political Quarterly 27 (March 1974):60-79. [Montgom- 
ery and Prince George's Counties] 

Religion (arranged chronologically) 

Golden, Harry. "The First Kennedy." In Our Southern Landsmen, pp. 60-68. 

New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1974. [Thomas Kennedy] 
Grant, Patricia K. "Mother Seton, Miracles and the Road that Could Lead to 

Sainthood." Baltimore Sun Magazine, 31 March 1974, pp. 5ff. 
McCullough, Raymond O., Jr. "A Brief History of Mercy Chapel." Glades Star 4 



Manuscript Notes 



221 



(December 1974):529ff. 

Hawkins, Nora. "Friendship Methodist Episcopal Church, South." Anne Arun- 
del County History Notes 5 (April 1974): [1-5]. 

Perkins, Rev. Russell H. The Seed Has Grown to Harvest: Centenary of St. Rose 
of Lima Mission 1874-1974 Ches&ptetke City, Maryland. Hackensack, New 
Jersey: Custombook, Inc., 1974. 

Social and Cultural (arranged chronologically) 

Walsh, Lorena S. and Menard, Russell R. "Death in the Chesapeake: Two Life 
Tables for Men in Early Colonial Maryland." Maryland Historical Magazine 
69 (Summer 1974):211-27. 

Breslaw, Elaine G. "Merrymaking in Old Annapolis: The Tuesday Club." Balti- 
more Sun Magazine, 24 March 1974, pp. 22-33. 

Goodwin, Louise Bland. "Chattolanee Hotel and Springs." History Trails 8, no. 
1(1974):4. 

Headley, Robert Kirk, Jr. Exit: A History of Movies in Baltimore. Published by 

the author, 1974. 

Harris, JoAnn, "Claire McCardell: Maryland's Fashion Prophet." Maryland 7 
(Winter 1974):2-5. 

Ford, Everett and Janice. Pre-Prohibition Beer Bottles & Breweries of Baltimore, 

Maryland. Published by the authors, 1974. 
[Heyl, Edgar G.] The Baltimore Bibliophiles 1954-1974. Baltimore: Evergreen 

House, 1974. 

Sports (arranged chronologically) 

"The Hyer-SuUivan Match." Kent Shoreman 9 (September 1974):45-47. 
Creamer, Robert W. Babe: The Legend Comes to Life. New York: Simon and 

Schuster, 1974. 

Kelly, Frederic. "The Babe Ruth Claire Knew." Baltimore Sun Magazine, 21 

April 1974, pp. 20-25. 
Wagenheim, Karl. Babe Ruth: His Life and Legend. New York: Praeger 

Publishers, 1974. 

Carter, Snowden. "Maryland's Golden Era of Foxhunting." Maryland Horse 40 
(May 1974):64-68. 

Robinson, Brooks, as told to Jack Tobin. Third Base is My Home. Waco, Texas: 
Word Books, 1974. 

Transportation (arranged chronologically) 

Akehurst, S. Virginia and Akehurst, Eva E. "The Yeoho Road." History Trails 
8 (no. 1, 1974) :l-3. 

Newell, Dianne. "The Short -Lived Phenomenon of Railroad Station-Hotels." 

Historic Preservation (July-September 1974):31-36. 
Doherty, William T., Jr. "Berkeley's Non-revolution: Law and Order and the 

Great Railway Strikes of 1877." West Virginia History 35 (July 1974):271-89. 
White, Roger B. "The W.B. & A.: A Short Outline of the Short Line." Anne 



222 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



Arundel County History Notes 5 (April 1974): [3-4]. 
BltetibeiffW, William J. "HistcM-y of the Street Car Lines of Montfoinety 

County." Montgomery County Story 17 (May 1974):1-10. 
Acton, Lucy. "The Museum of the Iron Horse." Baltimore 67 (May 1974):38ff. 

Urban and Town History (arranged alphabetically by name of town) 

Burdett, Harold N. Yesterday in Annapolis. Cambridge: Tidewater Publish- 
ers, 1974. 

Tunnell, Daniel R. and Hechtlinger, Adelaide. "Life in Annapolis." Early 
American Life 5 (October 1974):24-27; (December 1974):34-39. 

Bernard, Richard M. "A Portrait of Baltimore in 1800: Economic and Occupa- 
tional Patterns in an Early American City." Mmryland Historical Magazine W 
(Winter 1974):341-60. 

Darin, Grace. "The Story of Charles Village: The Building of a Community 
(1967-1974)." In Charles Village Journal, pp. 6-18. Baltimore: Charles Village 
Civic Association, 1974. 

Dehler, Katherine B. "Mt. Vernon Place at the Turn of the Century: A Vignette 
of the Garrett Family." Maryland Historical Magazine &d (Fall 1974):279-92. 

Eager, Elizabeth H. "A Marquis'-Eye View of Baltimore." Baltimore 67 
(November 1974):24ff. 

Gray, Ralph D. and Hartdagen, Gerald E. "A Glimpse of Baltimore Society in 
1827: Letters by Henry D. Gilpin." Maryland Historical Magazine 69 (Fall 
1974):256-70. 

Houstle, Arch E., Jr. "Mount Washington . . . Baltimore's 'Highly Salubrious 

Rural Retreat.' " Baltimore 67 (January 1974):29-37. 
Numberger, Ralph D. "The Great Baltimore Deluge of 1817." Maryland 

Historical Magazine 69 (Winter 1974):405-8. 
Sandler, Gilbert. The Neighborhood: The Story of Baltimore's Little Italy. 

Baltimore: Bodine and Associates, Inc., 1974. 
Hooper, Anne B. Braddock Heights: A Glimpse Backward. Published by the 

author, 1974. 

Chambers, Miriam P. Centreville in the Early 20th Century. Centreville: 

Corsica Bookshop, 1974. 
Brooks, Richard 0. New Towns and Communal Values: A Case Study of 

Columbia, Maryland. New York: Praegar, 1974. 
Filby, Vera. "The History of Friendship." Anne Arundel County History Notes 5 

(January 1974): [4]; 6 (October 1974): [3-4]. 
Walters, Clara Virginia. "History of Galena." Kent Shoreman 9 (July 1974):25ff 
Goodwin, Louise Bland. "The Story of Glencoe." History Trails 8 (no. 3, 

1974) :12. 

"History of New Yarmouth." Kent Shoreman 9 (October 1974):55ff. 

St. Mary's City Commission. St. Mary's City: A Plan for the Outdoor Museum. 

St. Mary's City: April 1974. 
Carr, Lois Green. "'The Metropolis of Maryland': A Comment on Town 

Development Along the Tobacco Coast." Maryland Historical Magazine 69 



Manuscript Notes 



223 



(Summer 1974):123-45. 

"Early History of Tolchester." Kent Shoreman 9 (September 1974):41ff. 

Curry, Leonard P. "Urbanization and Urbanism in the Old South: A Compara- 
tive View." Journal of Southern History 40 (February 1974):43^e0. 



Genealogica Marylandia 



MARYLAND MUSTER ROLLS 1757-1758 
Continued from Vol. 70, No. 1. 

MARY K. MEYER 



A MUSTER ROLL OF THE COMPANY OF FOOT IN THE MARYLAND FORCES 
COMMANDED BY CAPT. ERAS. WARE 



Eras. Ware 

Thos. Stoddert^^ 
Alex Somervell 
Rezen Beall 

George Barnce'* 
William Cavenaugh 
Peter Pearce Serjts. 
Benjn. Musgroves' 
William Henderson" 
Farewell Havens, Drummer 



Capt. 
1st Lieut. 
2nd Lieut. 
Ensign 

Saml. Jacobs 
Wm. Henderson 
Wm. Murphy'' 
John White'* 
Thos. Simpson'* 
Thos. Evens" 



Corpols. 



Thomas Farrell 


Joseph Francis 


William Arvin' 


Thos. Hughs 


James Linton 


Frans. Madden' 


Nathaniel Foreman 


James Marshall 


Stephin Tucker' 


Richd. Tandy 


Philip Blake 


John Norress' 


James Mcneall 


John Hock 


Richd. Tomlison' 


John Cole 


Joseph Loflin 


John Compton' 


Edward Baswell 


Thos. Fahee' 


John McKinney' 


Collen Thompson 


John Russel' 


Richd. Freeman' 


Rrans. Rowell 


John Gassett' 


Sabright Egington' 


Sabret Gray 


Richd. Flanagan' 


Alex Wilkinson' 


Edward Dugmore 


Richd. Gerret' 


Thos. Williamson' 


William Bryan 


Richd. Thomas 


John Migenta' 


John Brightwell 


Thos. Hellen' 


Charles Mosley' 


John Rowles' 


Joseph Harres' 


Wm. Jestes' 


Neal Carmichael' 


Robt. Burns' 


Richd. Buckinham' 


Thos. RusselP 


Thos. Jones' 


Thos. Lee' 


Samuel Deane' 


George Wright' 


Thos. Evens*' " 


Even Evens' 


James Hill' 


Thos. Simpson'-" 


Benjn. Freeman' 


John Hendly' 


William Nelson* 


Peter Hasty' 


Esaias Freeman' 


John Jones* 


John Keech' 


George Naylor' 


John Ramsey* 


Edward White' 


Benjn. Bird' 


Samuel Powell* 



224 



Maryland Historical Magazine 
Vol. 70, No. 2, Summer 1975 



Genealogica Marylandia 



225 



James Cliff 
John Glibra' 
J^jS Pi&rter' 
Edward Forde' 



Zachariah Scott' 
George Knight' 
Jttoi Carr' 



James Simpson" 
John Dorret'* 
John Siinf»€«i'* 



Pert Frederick March 8th 1758 



Mu[s]tered Men in a company of Foot Commanded by Capt. Francis Ware. The 
captain, second Lieutenant, one sarjent, two Corps. , arid the Drummer & riineteen Private 
men for the whole Muster being twenty Eight days, besides one officer abst. with Leave. 
The Ensigns, two Sarjts. & forty -five Private men on Commd., four sick & four on furlough 
& for which Certificates are given on the back of this Roll. This Muster Commences the 
9th of Feby. & Ends the 8th of March, both Days Encluded. The Remd. of the men are 
Mustered for there broken time as agst. there Names for which Certificates are given on 
the back of this Roll. 

Fras. Ware 

G. Ross, Comry. Alexr. Sumervill 

A MUSTER ROLL OF A COMPANY OF FOOT IN THE MARYLAND FORCES 
COMMANDED BY CAPT. ALEXD. BEALL 



Alexd. Beall 
Henry Prather 
Burr Harrison 
Barton Lucas 
Henry Hunzman 



Henry Fields 
Brill: Pindol 
Willm. Pedycort 
Alexd. Monroe 



Sarjts. 



Captain 
1st Lieut. 
2nd Lieut. 
Ensign 
Surgeon 

Saml. Harnwood 

Mordica Mading 
Thos. Harwood 
George Colmore 



Corpr. 



James McGorden 


John Roberts 


Thos. Fitzpatrick 


John Litrout 


James Neale 


Jacob Lamaster 


Willm. King 


James Webb 


Duglass Prince 


John Lanson 


Saml. Eads 


John Maxwell 


Morris Fitzgarld 


Henry Hope 


George Teater' 


Edwd. Beall 


Robt. Plunket 


Benja. Hughman' 


Jacob Hurst 


James Rymore 


James Brinkly' 


Robt. Shaw 


Willm. Matthews 


Saml. Freeman' 


Charles Suter 


Wm. Thompson 


Jonathon Hill' 


Richd. Howard 


Hugh Grimes 


Edwd. Harkins' 


Aron Love 


Thos. Barker 


Dunkin Jonston' 


Willm. Meeks' 


George Purmel' 


Thos. Winfield' 


Edwd. Mason' 


McCarty Smith' 


James Thetcherside* 


Saml. Pickeral' 


Willm. Vaug' 





Annapolis, December ye 30th 1758 

Mustered then in ye Company of Foot Commanded by Captain Alexd. Beall. The 
Captain, Two Lieuts., Ensigne, Surgeon, four Serjants, four Corporals & Twenty Six 
Private men for ye whole muster being 52 days. Besides fourteen Private men on 



226 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



Command at Fort Cumberland and one Private man on Furlough. This Muster 
Commences on the 9th day of November and ends the Thirtieth Day of December, Both 
Days Included. And I do moreover (by the order of His Excellency, Horatio Sharpe, Esqr.) 
Certify that the Company of Which Captain Alexr. Beall had the Command was 
Disbanded ye sd. 30th Day of Decembr. at Which Time the Commissary could not Attend 
to Muster it. And that ye Private men were on Command & on Furlough as set down 
against their Respective names on ye face of ye above Roll and that they were Effective in 
Capt. Alexd. Bealls Company for ye Whole Muster. In Witness whereof I have hereunto set 
my hand. 

Jos. Beall, Captain 



1. On Command 

3. Sick 

4. On Furlough 

33. Leave of absence Febry. 27th [1758] 

34. Discharged Febry. 16th [J758j 

35. Promoted to serjant Febry. 17th [1758] 

36. Promoted to Corpl. Febry. 17th [1758] 

37. Promoted to Cra-pl. Febry 18th [1758] 

38. Deceased Febry. 8th [1758] 



Reviews of Recent Books 



Colonial New Jersey: A History. By John E. Pomfret. (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 
1973. Pp. 327. $10.00.) 

Beginning students of colraiial America face an unenviable task: the period is large, the 

colonies, settled separately, develop at different speeds with different groups in charge. 
The factions are many and their fights meaningful because they set precedents in a new 
land. Worst of all for the student is colonial New Jersey, where in the complicated early 
years there are two Jerseys, an East and a West, two groups of proprietors, Eastern Scots 
and Western Quakers. (That some eastern Quakers become Anglicans — thank God they 
don't move west, too — does not help). Here especially no one could tell the players without 
a historical scorecard. Dr. Pomfret, who has written extensively about Proprietary New 
Jersey, untangles opposing teams and makes sense out of early events, although, no 
matter how clear his story, readers who allow themselves to be bogged down by names will 
still be somewhat confused. 

Dr. Pomfret writes with remarkable skill and succinctness about New Jersey's growth 
and political development. From the time of settlement the colonists gave notice that they 
were not so grateful for new economic or religious opportunity that they would be content 
to be ruled by others. The first rebellion occurred in 1672 after the proprietary governor 
began collecting quitrents and admitting as freemen only those he pleased. Deputies 
called their own meeting and elected a new governor. That rebellion was put down, but 
trouble continued. In later years, mobs seemingly attacked courts at will, freeing what 
amounted to political prisoners, Lewis Morris one time, his enemies another. Through the 
chaos, as Dr. Pomfret describes it, self-government flourished, although one may take 
issue with his statement that internal discord and factionalism hurt the colony. In a sense 
it may have. The colony might have developed more quickly had there been no friction, 
but it is just as true that given the quality of New Jersey's rulers — like Lord Cornbury who 
was sent over by England after the proprietors lost their right to govern — it was only the 
factionalism that saved the colony and colonists from oppression. Lord Cornbury's ring, 
milking the government and proprietors, demonstrated clearly how people in power 
behaved. When Lewis Morris became governor, disregarded his instructions, and named 
to the council only easterners, relatives, and cronies, with fellow proprietors dominating 
the Supreme Court, only factionalism or opposition to him kept the people relatively free. 

It should have been obvious to the British that New Jersey settlers, like Americans in 
general, would not welcome any limitation of their rights to govern themselves, even if they 
might go about protecting themselves in different ways. William Franklin, royal governor 
for more than a decade, did what he could to keep the colony loyal, but he could not 
succeed. Dr. Pomfret describes well the progress of the colony towards Revolution, and he 
completes the story with a brief account of the war and its aftermath. 

Much of the value of Dr. Pomfret's book lies in his ability to place New Jersey history in 
the context of English and American history. Nothing is seen in a vacuum, which is quite 
an achievement in a book of this size. A great many topics are treated: slavery, education, 
religious diversity, and architecture are among them. The only serious omission is a more 
sophisticated discussiwi of the lives of the people, what their days and years were like, 
what men did, what women did. But given the virtues of the book, the years and topics 
covered, that is a minor flaw. 

As an introduction to New Jersey history, and through New Jersey to the history of 
colonial America, this book is ideal. 

University of Maine at Orono Jerome Nadelhaft 



227 



228 Maryland Historical Magazine 

Robert Dinwiddle: Servant of the Crown. By John R. Alden. (Williamsburg: The Colonial 
Williamsburg Foundation, distributed by the University Press of Virginia, 1973, Pp. x, 
126. $5.95.) 

John R. Alden's gracefully written biographical study is a useful addition to the growing 
number of monographs on the dynamics of executive leadership in pre -Revolutionary 
America. Concentrating on the Virginia governorship of Robert Dinwiddie (1751-1757), 
Alden points up many of the long term, underlying causes of the American Revolution 
developed in broader works by LeonaM Labfiree, Jack P. Greene, and Bernard Bailyn. 

Born and educated in Scotland, Dinwiddie rose through commercial success to social 
and political prominence, first in Bermuda and later in Virginia. His advancement to a 
governorship was neither meteoric nor brilliant. But Dinwiddie shared certain character- 
istics with other royal officials. First, his political career rested on the establishment and 
cultivaticm of useful connecticms in England. Second, he was the deputy, not titular 
governor of the colony. Indeed, Dinwiddie paid £3,300 a year to the official governor, 
William Anne Keppel, earl of Albermarle. Finally, he found himself in ongoing conflict 
with colonial, assembly-dominated politics. This latter point is stressed by Alden in his 
examination of the controversies that dominated Dinwiddie's administration: the use of 
Virginia tax receipts for English purposes; the struggle for preferment between Reverend 
Thomas Dawson and Reverend William Stith; Dinwiddie's attempt to institute and 
collect a pistole fee and his demand that patented land be quitrented; and the diastrous 
attempts to curb French pretensions in the Ohio Valley. In each case the governor 
remained utterly British in viewpoint, unable "to become a broadminded statesman who 
could see Virginia and America as did the Virginians and Americans" (p. 19). Alden 
convincingly argues that Dinwiddie was, above all. an old school imperialist who 
continually sought to assert and expand British authority. That effort continued following 
the governor's resignation and retirement to England. In common with other colonial 
administrators, such as Thomas Pownall and William Knox, Dinwiddie favored addi- 
tional navigation acts, the recalling of the proprietary charters, a union of the colonies into 
confederacies, and some form of parliamentary taxation. Death in 1770 deprived him of 
seeing the revolutionary results of parliamentary vigor. 

Alden has produced a valuable and well-researched study which in most respects 
supercedes Louis K. Koontz's Robert Dinwiddie: His Career in American Colonial 
Government and Westward Expansion (1941). Credit is also due to the Colonial 
Williamsburg Foundation. Alden's book is a volume in the Foundation's Williamsburg in 
America Series — a useful collection for both specialists and the general reader and one 
that avoids Bicentennial hucksterism. 

University of Santa Clara Miles M. Mervin 

The Loyalists in Revolutionary America, 1760-1781. By Robert McCluer Calhoon. (New 
York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc., 1973. Pp. 580. $17.50.) 

This is a scholarly, immensely useful, often insightful but ultimately incomplete and 
unsatisfying study of the American Loyalists. In the first half of the book the author 
examines the ideas, attitudes, circumstances, and motivations of twenty-one leading 
opponents of colonial resistance in the years before 1776, and also such background 
matters as British colonial policy, Quaker pacifism, Anglican aspirations in the New 
World, and the political culture of the colonies. Thus good sketches of Cadwallader 
Colden, James Wright of Georgia, Daniel Dulany, Samuel Seabury, and many others give 
us an excellent view of "the Tory mind" that in many ways and for many reasons opposed 
Independence. Then, in a shift of approach, Calhoon turns to what the Loyalists did, and 



Reviews of Recent Books 



229 



what happened to them during the War of the Revolution. In a remarkable tour de force he 
manages to describe the essential posture and conduct of the Loyalists in each colony, as 
well as placing them carefully in the context of British politics and military strategy. 
Altogether the book vastly increases our knowledge of the Loy'aKsts and will be used by 
scholars and students for many years. 

There is, for example, an ifrcisive chaptef mi "flie "f easonableness" of Tory opposition to 
the movement of Independence: if die TiltMd fflfdtr and harmony in society, if one 
believed in the efficacy of lawful processes of change, if one had faith in the good will of 
leaders in London as well as ill Boston, and if one understood the depth of English national 
identity in the colonies and the danger and trauma of "declaring" a new one, then Loyalist 
arguments were cogent indeed. We need to see this case in full force if we are to 
understand the American Revolution. In regional case studies of Barnstable, Massachu- 
setts, and the Hudson Valley of New York, Calhoon makes superb use of monographs and 
also helps us to see what was happening among common people, who, for reasons as 
various as among leaders, retained substantial loyalty to the crown during the Revolution. 
A rich sense of the origins, motivations and vicissitudes of American Loyalism emerges. 

Though the author is generally sensitive to the role ideas play in history, there are 
lapses. His handling of the Great Awakening, for example, emphasizing in it a caricatured 
Calvinism of materialism, brittle individually, and human sinfulness, fails to grasp its 
social radicalism, its exaltation of spiritual union, and its sense of mission that made it far 
more a departure from earlier Calvinism than an extension of it. It is also irritating to find 
otherwise penetrating studies of Jonathan Boucher and Peter Oliver marred by unneces- 
sary excursions into "psychohistory." Dubious speculations about Boucher's "remarkable 
escape from an obscure and humble childhood" and "his image of himself as a man of 
unpredictable dramatic impulses" (p. 231), distract the reader from an otherwise lucid 
exposition of his political thought. Similarly, preoccupation with thoroughly conventional 
"images" of the violence of nature and the nearness of death in Oliver's Origin and 
Prof^re^!' of the American Rebellion wastes space that might be used more helpfully in a 
straightforward probing of Oliver's reaction to the events and personalities of the 
Revolution. 

Overall, though, the least satisfying aspect of the book is its incompleteness despite its 
length and wealth of detail — or one might even say because of them. There are forty-eight 
chapters on thirteen colonies and hundreds of people and thousands of incidents, but no 
themes strong enough to keep the book from being much more than an encyclopedia of 
Loyalism. As such it is valuable, but it is not a full, interpretative history. Furthermore, 
even to provide us the basic information, a third section is needed on what happened to 
the Loyalists after the war — the book ends abruptly, as though the author (or perhaps his 
publisher) simply decided it was long enough at more than 500 pages. Thus, Calhoon has 
performed a prodigious, useful labor in telling as much of the story as he has, but we need 
additionally a completion of the record of events and consequences through the 1780s, and 
then a critical history of American Loyalism at once shorter and more comprehensive than 
this volume. 

Syracuse University Ralph Ketcham 

Thomas Jefferson: An Intimate History. By Fawn M. Brodie. (New York: W. W. Norton 
and Company, Inc., 1974. Pp. 591. $12.50.) 

Few recent books have enjoyed a more successful promotion, or won more popular 
reviews, than Brodie's Jefferson. In form, this is a scholarly biography, tied to primary 
sources and replete with notes. But because of the use or misuse of evidence, it is close to a 



230 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



historical novel or a fictionalized biography. A more appropriate title might be: Forbidden 
Fruits: The Secret Loues of Thomas Jefferson, for the book revolves around Jefferson's 
relationship to four women (his mother, his wife, his lovable Paris playmate, Maria 
Cosway, and his comely slave and alleged concubine, Sally Hemings). 

Brodie organizes her book around Jefferson's public career, but tries to use new insights 
into his private life to explain his politicid e©atoibuti<Mis. Beyond the added psychological 
dimension, her biography lacks subtlety and distinction, and by its very superficiality will 
disappoint Jefferson scholars. Brodie has no understanding of eighteenth century thought; 
I cannot imagine a more sophomoric and^^ssi^entist treatment of Jefferson's religious and 
political beliefs. Brodie accepts Jeffergs® as a child of the "Enlightenment," as a true 
revolutionary, as a spokesman for libertarian theory, as a religious iconoclast and Deist, 
and as a great democrat, but in all cases begs the immense definitional problems that lurk 
behind such useless labels and also the shifting enthusiams that make it so difficult to 
place Jefferson in any clear theoretical tradition. By selective appeal to his more famous 
letters or public papers, Brodie reveals a Jefferson much more sanguine about man, more 
hopeful about the future, than a fuller reading permits. This allows her to draw sharp 
polarities between him and John Adams and Alexander Hamiltcoi, and to obscure the 
major areas of overlap in their thought. 

Any judgment on the merit of this bo<^ has to rest mi its acknowledged purpose — to 
discover the complex person behind the public mask. More often than not, I suspect that 
Brodie created rather than discovered the real and hidden Jefferson. Either way, the book 
reveals a guilt-ridden, often tormented, and ultimately tragic man. It plays on the dark 
and somber undertones that both helped shape and then highlight the bright and 
glittering public achievement. In the early chapters, Brodie searches among the meager 
artifacts for clues as to Jefferson's relationship to his parents. Drawing on suggested but not 
explicit psychological themes, borrowed in part from the highly speculative theories of 
Erik Erikson, she finds early sources of resentment and guilt, particularly in Jefferson's 
dominating mother. Brodie deals gently with Jefferson's marriage to Martha Wayles 
Skelton. The evidence allows no full portrait of Martha, but it does document the 
immense impact of domestic worries upon Jefferson's checkered political career. Appar- 
ently because of theories about normal sexual behavior, rather than any direct evidence, 
Brodie assumes that JeffcEson had an adulterous affair with Maria Cosway. Jefferson's 
letters certainly attest to the seriousness of this brief Paris infatuation, and at least make 
such added speculation almost believable (I still feel compelled to suspend judgment). 
From this point on, and in the most dramatic chapters of the book, Brodie drops all 
reticence or restraint. She weaves a complex story around not an alleged but an assumed 
liaison between Jeffersora and Sally H^ings. By Brodie's account, this love affair b^an 
in Paris, led to five non-acknowledged sons and daughters, and continued until Jefferson's 
death. 

The only direct evidence for Jefferson's illicit affair with Hemings is the original, 
politically motivated charges by an alienated and paranoid publisher, James Callender, 
which caused a considerable stir during Jefferson's presidency, and a ghosted account in 
1873 by two former Monticello slaves, one a son of Sally who proudly claimed Jefferson as 
his father. Brodie documents one necessary condition for taking these allegations 
seriously — Jefferson was in the same household with Sally at the time of each conception. 
Beyond that, we have no direct evidence. The absence of such, and the seeming difficulty 
of Jefferson successfully concealing an affair of over three decades, has led most historians 
to discount the allegations. But no one can prove a negative. Careful historians have no 
alternative but to suspend final judgment. Since Brodie early castigates them for 



Reviews of Recent Books 



231 



reticence, I assumed she was prepared to offer dramatic new proof." She does not. Instead 
of carefully marshalling evidence for the liaison, she almost always assumes it and makes 
it the key to Jefferson's later life. Having assumed the affair, Brodie spends much time 
trying to account for the suppression of all direct evidence, as if this "curious" absence 
lends a type of confirmation to the assumed relatioiiship. Not only Jefferson's public 
stand on issues, but his relationship to his two datlght^i^tsrtfe oti iiew mestriing in Kght of 
Sally and her children. Jefferson's domestic joy in Sally helps erode his early commitment 
to emancipation, prevents him from freeing his own slaves, and pulls him deeper and 
deeper into a type of moral hypocrisy — a democrat in public, a despot at Mcmticello. 

Almost all the drama of the book rests on an illicit love affair that may never have 
occurred. Brodie's convoluted arguments, her painfully obvious special pleading, her 
contrived use of evidence, her recourse to obscure symbolism hurt rather than help her 
case. I am now much less willing to give credence to the story than before I read the book. 
Too often she has to read deep and sinister implications into innocent words (she 
documents the beginning of the secret love by Jefferson's more frequent use of "mulatto" 
to characterize French soils), or resorts to such hedging statements as "it can be argued 
that" or "the possibility can be suggested." She defines much of her evidence as 
"psychological," which begs the empirical validity of unstated psychological theories that 
determine what is evidence, the degree of probability that such theories bestow upon 
symbolic evidence, and the clinical skill of Brodie in interpreting such evidence. When so 
much has to be begged, one has moved far beyond the discipline of history, beyond the 
theoretical and conceptual precision, the rigorous logic, the confirming evidence de- 
manded by any form of empirical inquiry. 

Yet, Brodie's Jefferson demands Hemings. The affair is an essential clue to the man she 
portrays, more essential even than the external story. Without Sally, Brodie would have to 
start over and construct a quite different and much less complex man. Thus, by the 
standards of historical inquiry, Brodie's heretofore hidden Jefferson has to be dismissed as 
a fictional character, a product of her rich imagination mingled with elusive psychological 
speculation. But what is most saddening to me is not Brodie's failure to adhere to the 
logical and evidential standards of our discipline (journalists and literary biographers 
violate these all the time), but rather the alacrity with which a gullible lay public certifies 
such presentist distortion or unproveable speculation as a legitimate or even a normative 
example of historical understanding. 

University of Wisconsin Paul K. Conkin 



America: The Middle Period. Essays in Honor of Bernard Mayo. Edited by John B. Boles. 
(Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1973. Pp. 278. $8.50.) 

Bernard Mayo is a master stylist, was an extraordinarily fine teacher, and remains a 

conscientious scholar. No one who has been associated with Professor Mayo has failed to 
be impressed with both his human and professional intellectual qualities. He impressed 
his students with the depth and breadth of his learning. Pendleton Gaines has written in 
this volume a kind appreciation of his taskmaster professor. Mayo frightened his new 
graduate students with his bibliographic demands — which if taken literally was a life-time 
of reading, and no doubt was meant to be so. 

The fifteen essays in this book constitute a diorama of essay writing about the 
mid-nineteenth century in American history. J. Edwin Hendricks has written a thor- 
oughly enlightening essay on Charles Thomson and "A New Order of the Ages." It would 



232 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



indeed embarrass most American historians if they were asked to identify Charles 
Thomson, Secretary to the Continental Congress, and devisor of Novus Ordo Seclorum. 
His influence, however, reached far beyond a search for a fitting motto for the new nation. 
For instance his scientific interest had an impact upon the formation of the prestigious 
American Philosophical Society. He also contributed an article appended to Thomas 
Jefferson's Notes on the State of Virginia. 

Two other essays have substantial enlightening qualities. George Green Shackleford's 
"Thomas Jefferson and the Fine Arts of Northern Italy: A Peep into Elysium," brings into 
clearer and more succinct perspective this aspect of Jefferson's catholic taste in the fields 
of art and architecture. The author thinks the universities of Turin, Milan, and Pavia had 
some important bearing on Jefferson's design for the University of Virginia. John S. 
Pancake's article on "Alexander Hamilton as Public Administrator: A Reappraisal" is of 
substantive revisive value. Hamilton's indiscretions were as impressive as his successes, 
and view«d throwgh the eyes of John S. Pancake, "Alexander Hamilton may have been 
dead before Burr's bullet ever reached i*s mark," 

By singling out the above essays the reviewer in no sense overlooks the significance of 
others. The list of selections is concluded with Robert A. Brent's brief appraisal, "Nicholas 
P. Trist: A Discredited Diplomat Vindicated." This essay presents a description of the 
tragic career of a proud and dedicated career diplomat who disobeyed President James K. 
Polk's orders and possibly changed the course of one aspect of the United States's 
occupation of the Southwest, and its relations with Mexico. The author speculates on the 
possible dramatic results to the nation had Trist obeyed presidential instructions. Beyond 
this there is the human story of Trist's long and patient attempt to collect his expense 
account. 

All of the essays in this volume are subtantial documentation of the good quality of 
historical training which Bernard Mayo's students received in his courses and seminars. 
They give substance to Pendleton Gaines's appraisal of his professor's capabilities and 
frightening p'opensities as a critical scholar. A festschrift of this nature is ample 
justification for its publication. While far-ranging and loosely related, the essays of 
necessity run a variegated thread of scholarship through a dramatic period in American 
history. They run the course from truly local concerns of Virginia history to the broader 
ones of the nation in what must still be considered the formative years. 
University of Indiana Thomas D. Clark 

Free Men All: The Personal Liberty Laws of the North, 1780-1861. By Thomas D. Morris. 
(Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1974. Pp. xii, 253. $12.50.) 

Thomas D. Morris has written a very interesting and useful book about the personal 
liberty laws in five northern states during the eight years prior to the Civil War. This sub- 
ject has received scant scholarly treatment, although historians have outlined the debate 
over these laws in the 1850s in particular as one part of the war of words which culminated 
surprisingly, not predictably, in secession and civil war in 1860-1861. 

This book is most welcome for two reasons. First, by treating the period 1780-1861, 
Morris properly laid the historical foundation for the confrontation in the 1850s over the 
1850 Fugitive Slave law. The reader will understand after reading Morris why the North — 
never a lover of black men — reacted so vehemently against the federal law. The fight 
against enactment represented a last stand of sorts by the North in a long battle stretching 
over the previous seventy years to define in each of the northern states how to accomplish 
harmoniously the transition from a slave to a free community in a federal system the Con- 



Reviews of Recent Books 



233 



stitution for which recognized a "person held to service or labor." 

Second, the book is a vivid illustration of the complexities of the federal system. Mem- 
bers ofthe hmbh and bar and legal hklmmm'tiiitikm* ever hem mired in the marshy and 
murky eddies of choice-of-law issues .■^■b jjpmei f Mi ft how the northern states' efforts to 
define minimal guarantees of personal liberty ^imi^ jury trials and the writs of habeas 
carpus«nd homine replegiando conflicted with southerners' right of recapture of fugitive 
slav^ as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. 

The actual working out of this problem resulted less in a direct confrontation between 
North and South than a contest first between the northern states and national government 
over the proper jurisdiction of the respective governments, and then within the national 
government itself as to whether any federal law that was passed would incorporate even 
minimal procedural safeguards for personal liberty of citizens located in the northern 
states. 

By the Supreme Court's decision in Prigg v. Pennsylvania the North in 1842 witnessed 
the destruction of its personal liberty legislation outlining slave return procedures. The 
Prigg decision declared that the fugitive slave clause of the U. S. Constitution had con- 
ferred exclusive authority on the national government and that the states, therefore, had 
no power to enforce the clause even to the extent of providing procedures supplementing 
those outlined in the 1793 Fugitive Slave law. 

The Prigg decision meant, as Morris demonstrates so well, that the northern states had 
to change the forum of battle from the state to the national level to incorporate in federal 
law that which had been state law in some jurisdictions prior to Prigg. The North, as evi- 
denced by the 1850 Fugitive Slave law, failed completely in this attempt. The result was 
a decade of tumult marked by public demonstrations and sharp confrontations between 
federal and state judicial authorities in the North over efforts of the national government 
to enforce the law. 

One such confrontation occurred over the efforts of the national government to curb 
aid to fugitive slaves by an abolitionist Wisconsin newspaper editor, Sherman Booth. The 
outcome was an 1859 decision of the United States Supreme Court in Ableman v. Booth 
which declared the 1850 Fugitive Slave law constitutional and which was a powerful brief 
on behalf of the supremacy of national judicial power. 

This reader especially appreciates Morris's attention to the little-studied and much- 
misunderstood writs of habeas corpus and hornine replegiando insofar as their part in the 
discourse on personal liberty during the pre-Civil-War era is concerned. The writ of habeas 
corpus in particular after the outbreak of civil war became a subject of great public dis- 
cussion and concern. Morris's book offers much background for explanations of this pub- 
lic concern and for why Congress in the 1863 Habeas Corpus Act, in the abortive Wade- 
Davis bill, and in the second 1867 Habeas Corpus Act took pains to spell out the conditions 
under which the privilege of the writ would be suspended or resorted to it as one means 
of guaranteeing civil rights, which eventually became both the pre-condition for and 
essence of Reconstruction. 

Despite the legal-constitutional focus of this book, it has much to offer the general reader 
who is interested in understanding the outworkings of constitutional issues in a federal 
system that operated on decidedly different premises than those which characterize the 
system today. If one were to criticize Morris, it would be for failing to delineate suffi- 
ciently or clearly these premises. It matters a great deal that the debate over personal 
liberty took place in a state- centered federal system in which the most concern as to 
possible infringement of personal liberty resulted from what states did and in which liberty 
was defined as something governments could not abridge or deny rather than as a catalogue 
of rights which it was the government's duty to protect. 



234 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



It is ironic that the Fugitive Slave clause of the Constitution, which eventually was 
construed to deny both of these premises, prompted a transformation, albeit temporarily, 
{f(fm iP'rMsttth* to a pissitive concepttftSizafton of Ule rc*S' of govertttmant— both state and 
national — vis-a-vis individual liberty. This transformation provided continuity in con- 
stitutional discourse from the ante-bellum into Civil War and Reconstruction America. 
Vinson, Elkins, Searls, Conrmlly, and Smith Catherine M. Txrrant 

Houston 



Serpent in Eden: H. L. Mencken and the South. By Fred C. Hobson, Jr. (Chapel Hill: 
University of North Carolina Press, 1974. Pp. xv, 242. $8.95.) 

"Monograph," defines the Random House College Dictionary, is "a learned treatise 
on a particular subject." The volume at hand, Pfed HobSon's Serpent in Eden, is a perfect 
example of that definition. It pursues a limited topic exhaustively and, for the greater 
part, pursues it well. 

The title misleads. This book is about Mencken and southern literature. The details 
of Mencken's various southern excursions, the South's overall reaction to his pungent 
criticisms, the exact manner in which the Sage of Baltimore used the South as the reductio 
ad absurdum of American culture — all of these and more are absent from Hobson's book. 
His real subject is Mencken's influence on the rebirth of southern literature in the 1920s, 
beginning in earnest in 1920 with the republication of Mencken's 1917 essay "The Sahara 
of the Bozart," which appeared in Mencken's Prejudices, Second Series. The force of 
Mencken's influence was greatest during the next few years, through the Scopes trial in 
1925, and appropriately Hobson devotes three-fourths of his study to this period. The 
remainder of the book, in fact, details Mencken's decline as a literary force in southern 
literature as the region's writers moved, in Hobson's own words, "beyond Mencken." At 
its core, this is a study of southern writing approached through its then greatest promoter- 
critic. 

There are few surprises here. For the most part old suspicions and insights are shorn 
up by Hobson's thorough scholarship. The idea that Mencken was a sort of midwife to 
modern southern literature is an old one; Hobson restates it with the force of substantial 
research. He moves on to suggest that Mencken was responsible for the form of early 
modern southern literature, too. By his tireless encouragement and admonition Mencken 
promoted his own concept of art and society in the new southern writers, Hobson asserts, 
notably the idea that the artist must be in active rebellion against society. Thus, contends 
Hobson, "Menckenism as a literary force" bent southern writers toward social criticism, 
aloofness, revolt against tradition. Mencken thereby not only fostered southern belles 
lettres, but shaped it as well, through his influencing and championing of Howard Odum, 
James Branch Cabell, Emily Clark and The Reviewer, young journalists like Gerald John- 
son, W. J. Cash, the Harrises, and many others. 

Within the confines Hobson sets for himself in this book, he generally carries the day 
for his thesis. One can cavil at some points, of course. He comes perilously close to credit- 
ing Mencken with being so central to the revival of sub-Potomac prose that incautious 
readers might conclude the movement would not have happened without Mencken. And 
did Mencken invent and singlehandedly promote and disseminate the notion that the 
South was culturally backward, or was he merely the most outspokem and influential 
purveyor of a point of view that lurked in the minds of many? The question becomes 
important when Hobson asserts that Thomas Wolfe was "in almost every way a Mencke- 



Reviews of Recent Books 



235 



nite" simply because Wolfe's targets were the same as Mencken's in the early twenties 
(p. 68). By taking a generalized point of view and dubbing it "Menckenism," Hobson 
strongly implies that Mencken conceived and hatched that point of view and that it 
WwM net have existed or would not have taken nearly the same shape witkoui Min. It 
imftii more likely that the thesis should be toned down, that Mencken s«:ved as a sym- 
bol, simply a shorthand notation for an <fl^tude others also held. Hobson almost says 
as much himself in borrowing Emily CladiW «bMi?vation that Mencken became "a state 
of mind, a school of thought" (pp. 78-'^. It » a matter of emphasis, mostly, but a 
RftfgiHg one. One can ai-so questieH Hobson's kaving k both ways wh^ he says of 
"Menckenism" that "those whom it did not inspire, it challenged" (p. 69). In this way 
the author brings under Mencken's spell authors who, like the Charleston poetry group, 
did not respond to his view of southern society and what should be done about it. And 
given the way the highly influential and successful Nashville Agrarians brushed aside 
not only Mencken's criticism of the South but also his entire prose-oriented approach 
to literature, Hobson's conclusion that Mencken was "the first cause in their original 
consideration" of the region and its writing seems shaky (p. 162). 

But these criticisms are, for the most part, mere nibbling at the edges of a generally 
well-turned work. Hobson's scholarship is thorough, almost to a fault, as when he docu- 
ments the point of Mencken's influence so repeatedly. The author's research in printed 
sources, interviews, and private correspondence (including the recently unlocked Mencken 
material in New York) is exhaustive. He has read this material with considerable reflection, 
and insight is often the reward. His analysis of the relationship between Mencken and 
James Branch Cabell, for example, is very good, as is his detailed recitation of Mencken's 
association with The Reviewer. And Hobson has avoided that pitfall so fatal to those who 
write about Mencken, trying to write like Mencken. With the notes safely stored in the 
back of the book, even Hobson's detailed thoroughness fails to mar the prose. 

In the end the primary dissatisfactions which remain are in the scope of the work, its 
monographic nature. Unanswered questions abound. Why was the South so ready to ex- 
plode in 1920? Even Hobson admits that Mencken's match found ready powder and that 
Mencken himself was startled by the reaction his "Sahara" piece received. And why were 
so many women (e.g., Julia Peterkin, Emily Clark, Julia Harris, Nell Battle Lewis, Frances 
Newman) involved? These questions, of course, ask that the book be different, and to 
criticise Hobson for the volume he did not write is unfair. If the reader can keep his atten- 
tion focused on the literary history of the South in one decade and on the relationship of 
that literature to one strong figure, then he will be rewarded. And when the definitive 
history of southern literature comes to be written, that work will stand in considerable debt 
to Hobson's industrious spadework in this specialized but very competent study. 
Hollins College William J. Evitts 

The Rich, the Well Born, and the Powerful: Elites and Upper Classes in History. Ed. 
Frederic Cople Jaher. (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1973. Pp. 379. $15.00.) 

Twelve historical essays on "elites" and "upper classes" represent the collective effort 
of thirteen historians and sociologists under the editorship of Frederic C. Jaher. Most, if 
not all, of thfe experts are professors at the University of Illinois at Champagne-Urbana. 
The chronological and geographic ground covered by these twelve essays is impressive. 
They range from Classical Athens and the Roman Republic to Renaissance Florence and 
Victorian England and from Tsarist Russia to the American Midwest. It is patently impos- 



236 



Maryland Historical Magazine 



sible to do justice in a brief review to so wide a variety of rich historical materials. However, 
a few comments may serve as a guide and stimulant to prospective readers who peruse 
this collection of case studies in the history of elite groups. 

Comparative Mstory on this scale poses certain problems of interpretation and manage- 
ability. No common "method" or approach can be imposed on such a large and diverse 
group of specialists. Each author^^ties and treats his "elite" in his own way. Two of the 
authors, Richard Mitchell (RoraMi Aristocracy) and Walter Arnstein (Victorian Aristoc- 
racy) examine a ruling class m%r a considerable length of time, review a large body of 
secondary literature, and attempt to answef a number &£ large questions historiaHB and 
sociologists ask about ruling classes: their social composition and recruitment, their func- 
tions and levers of power and status, and especially their capacity to achieve a delicate 
balance providing a sufficient accessibility to insure renewal and vitality but not so much 
openness as to swamp the "old guard," destroy continuity, and undermine the cohesion of 
the aristocracy as a ruling class. 

The scope of this kind of elite study will appeal to the reader most interested in broad 
conclusions, and he will find that both Mitchell and Arnstein do it very well. In fact, Arn- 
stein's extended essay on the remarkable staying-power of the English aristocracy right 
up to 1914 is, in my opinion, a brilliant synthesis of the current historical issues, written 
with clarity, thoroughness, and sane judgments. Arnstein employs the proper measure 
of tabular statistics, telling quotations, literary allusion, and even a spot of poetry: "We 
want community of feeling, And landlords kindly in their dealing" (p. 247). Here is a 
couplet feat may tell lis more about mutual respect and the resilience of elites than volumes 
on "deference" and "dignity" in the abstract. 

Another group of essays treats certain regional and local elites over shorter time periods. 
Although the authors ask a more limited number of questions, they often get to know their 
elites more intimately, imparting a flesh-and-blood dimension that the larger syntheses 
cannot hope to attain. For example, Frederic Jaher's description of the fashionable "Four 
Hundred" in New York of the "gay nineties" recaptures the "world" of the great social 
pace-setters, Mesdames Astor, Vanderbilt, and Stuyvesant Fish. Enormously wealthy, 
they excluded the "new rich" such as the Goulds and Harrimans from their social set. In 
fact, their pride in inherited wealth, comments Jaher (p. 266), may account for their lack 
of vocational achievement; 60 per cent of the 400 had no occupation outside high society. 
For a country that prided itself on the Horatio Alger myth and on rewards for talent, merit, 
and achievement, the New York elite was very eccentric indeed. Once more, contrasted 
to the social elites of Boston and Philadelphia in 1900, New York high society pa^formed 
no civic services (their charities were minimal) and had almost no cultural interests (p. 277). 
They make the French court nobility of 1789 look positively utilitarian. 

Thomas Krueger's and William Glidden's 380 members of the New Deal intelligentia 
are a striking contrast to Jaher's 400 New York families. Three-quarters of the New Deal 
intelligentia were sons of well-to-do professional and businessmen, 90 per cent had college 
degrees or better, and all were about forty when they entered Roosevelt's service in the 
early 1930s. They were highly motivated toward achievement and civic service. Making 
up an intellectual, professional, and even bureaucratic elite themselves, they nonetheless 
had a strong commitment to equal treatment of the citizenry and a belief that administra- 
tive planning and economic growth could do wonders to improve the living standards and 
quality of American life. Somehow with all of their faults — naivete and arrogance, no doubt 
— the New Deal intellectuals look rather better than many high civil servants we have seen 
since. They had a laudable vision and they wesce honest people. 

Another approach is to select a single aspect or function of a regional or local elite. For 



Reviews of Recent Books 



237 



example, Richard Trexler examines the attitudes and policies of the Florentine elite (the 
cittadini) toward charity in the 14th and 15th centuries. He identifies several categories 
of "poor," distinguishing the "shamed poor" — oftenfallen gentry — from the"public poor" — 
day laborers, beggars, and vagabonds. The institutional response recognized this distinc- 
tion. Pawn-shops, for example, could only help those who had something to pawn, like the 
scions of impoverished noble houses. Was not the first obligation of an elite to its fallen 
members or awGciates? Trexler's article is as much a contribution to the history of pub- 
lic welfare as it is to the history of elites. 

Still another approach to elite studies is to focus on local elites in conflict. John McKay 
examines a native business elite in Russia in the late nineteenth century struggling with 
its foreign competitOTS over the development and operation of a steel complex at Briansk. 
McKay gives us a case study in business history. Similarly, Keith Hitchins discusses the 
struggle of a clerical-intellectual elite in Transylvania against the Hapsburg administra- 
tion in Vienna in the eighteenth century. This so-called Uniate church had an efficient 
organization from bishop to parish priest, from synod to classroom, and as teachers, 
Hitchins claims, they pioneered a "national (Roumanian) ideology" (p. 148). Hitchins's 
essay is a study of group ideology. 

I had alluded to only seven of twelve essays contained in this volume. If 1 have found the 
other five less interesting, it is for one of three reasons: (1) neither the substance nor the 
approach of the article appeared original (Robin Seager, "Elitism and Democracy in Class- 
ical Athens" and David Ransel, "Bureaucracy and Patronage: The View from an 
Eighteenth-Century Russian Letter-Writer"), (2) the approach was too vague or abstract 
(Paul Drake, "The Political Responses of the Chilean Upper Class to the Great Depression 
and the Threat of Socialism, 1931-33"), and (3) the quantitative apparatus was too long 
and elaborate to justify the limited results obtained (Frank Foster, "Politics and Com- 
munity in Elizabethan London" and Richard Jensen, "Metropolitan Elites in the Mid- 
West, 1907-29; A Study in Multivariate Collective Biography"). I should add, however, 
that this discrimination is partly a matter of personal preference (especially regarding 
"originality"), and surely all of the contributions are carefully done and worth reading. 

Aside from the scholarly qualities of each essay — and most rank high — what can be 
learned from collecting twelve different studies in one volume? The broader essays on "rul- 
ing classes" offer us more by way of sociological generalization and insight, especially re- 
garding the resourcefulness of aristocracies like the Roman and English. The studies of 
regional and local elites, are more useful as entrees into such areas as public welfare, 
business history, group ideology, local politics, public administration, and career analysis 
where, I suspect, the essayist's central interest often lies. But either way, the study of 
elites opens a wide window on the broad horizon of social history, demonstrating that 
today's historian need no longer be limited to "high politics," wars, and the biographies 
of "Great Men." 

Johns Hopkins University Robert Forster 



Book Notes 



Murder, 1776 and Washington's Policy of Silence. By William H. W. Sabine. (Brooklyn, 
N. Y.: Thomas Gaus' Sons, 1973. Pp. 207. $7.50.) This book, in examining the available 
facts about the death in 1776 of Brigadier-General Nathaniel Woodhull of the New York 
militia, sheds considerable light on conditions on Long Island immediately before the 
Battle of Long Island. Woodhull was also President of the New York Provincial Congress. 
The author examines the available evidence and presents a convincing case for the expla- 
nation that Woodhull died from afi infection in a wound inflicted to make an arranged 
capture by British troops look genuine. The fai^t that Woodhull's troops had failed to 
detect and prevent the British flanking movement through Jamaica Pass weighs heavily 
in his judgment, as does the fact that Washington made no comment when Howe notified 
him of Woodhull's death. This book, copiously annotated and usefully indexed, casts new 
light on a dark corner of the War for Independence. [John Carter Matthews ] 

Winter Quarters: George Washington and the Continental Army at Valley Forge. By 
Noel fiusch. (New York: Liveright, 1974. Pp. xiv, 206. $7.95.) As the two hundredth anni- 
versary of the American Revolution approaches, one is reminded of the immortal words of 
the venerable Jimmy Durante: "Everybody wants ta get inta de act." Now comes Mr. 
Noel F. Busch, an alumnus of Time and Life and author of books on Adlai Stevenson, 
both Roosevelts, and the battle of Tsushima, as well as a Concise History of Japan. The 
book is clearly written, usably indexed, and tastefully illustrated. There are no footnotes. 
Regretfully, for it's a pleasant book, it must be said that it is a study which can be disre- 
garded by serious students. [John Carter Matthews] 

At General Howe's Side 1776-1777. The Diary of General William Howe's aide de camp, 
Captain Friedrich von Muenchhausen. Translated by Ernst Kipping and annotated by 
Samuel Stelle Smith. (Monmouth Beach. N. J.: Philip Freneau Press, 1974. Pp. 85. 
$14.95.) Since General William Howe could speak only English and General von Heister, 
commanding the Hessians, could use only German and French, Captain Muenchhausen 
of the Hessian Leib regiment was appointed wing adjutant to German auxiliary forces and 
aide-de-camp to Howe on November 18, 1776, shortly before the evacuation of Fort Lee. 
He served as aide to Howe until Howe's departure from Philadelphia in May of 1778. 
During that time he kept a diary, actually more a running account of military events 
which he sent piece by piece as opportunity offered to his brother, who was war councillor 
at the Royal Court of Hannover. The result is an informed, clearly written, largely dis- 
passionate and thoroughly interesting account of events. The notes, index, and appendix 
are useful. This book must not be missed by specialists in the period nor by people who 
enjoy history as it should be written. [John Carter Matthews] 

The Labor Wars: From the Molly Maguires to the Sitdowns. By Sidney Lens. (Garden 
City: Anchor Books, 1974. Pp. xii, 400. $2.95.) This account emphasizes the role of rank 
and file workers, not a few self-serving leaders or prosperous unions. Laborers fought 
countless bloody battles against business and its persistent allies (presidents, governors, 
courts, police) from the 1870s to World War II. Using every imaginable weapon (e.g., 
sabotage, arson, murder) they fought savage warfare, but Lens also reminds readers of 
the humanistic dimension to their struggle. Workers pioneered the tactics of passive 
non-resistance and "participatory democracy," sometimes sacrificed their meager wages 
and security for less fortunate workers, and occasionally displayed remarkable comradery 
toward co-workers regardless of race or sex. This book is comprehensive and Maryland 



238 



Book Notes 



239 



readers will be especially interested in the account of the B & 0 strike of 1877. [Roderick N. 
Syon] 

Failure of a Dream? Essays in the History of American Socialism. Edited by John H. M. 
Laslett and Seymour Martin Lipset. (Garden City: Anchor Press/Doubleday, 1974. Pp. 
xin, 738. $12.95 cloth, SS.-bfe^a^ei'.yk^ ifltere narrative or polemic, this volume of eighteen 
essays addresses itself to the important questions about socialism's plight in America. 
For example, when and how did socialist dogmatism and factionalism, American trade 
unions, and agrarian traditions impede socialism's growth? Have social mobility, capi- 
talism's material triumphs, and liberal politics dwarfed an indigenous Left? The contribu- 
tors (sociologists, historians, and socialists) include Daniel Bell, James Weinstein, and 
Norman Thomas. Almost half the essays have never before been published, and most are 
followed by critical comments to which some essayists have appended brief "replies." 
Socialist activists and iiite^lectiMilB will fetdTOOst essays enlightening and will discover in- 
sights not available in any other publication on the American Left. Even the "general 
reader" who lacks a knowledge of socialist roots will find the volume exceptionally informa- 
tive if he is willing to peruse it patiently. No reader should miss Staughton Lynd's conclud- 
ing essay — a sensitive summons to transform yesterday's "dream that failed" into tomor- 
row's living reality. [Roderick N. Ryon] 

Into the Twenties: The United States from Armistice to Normalcy. By Burl Noggle. 
(Urbana; University of Illinois Press, 1974. Pp. ix, 233. $8.50.) More a synthesis of existing 
research than a work of original scholarship, metd less an eStflnple of a daring his- 
torical reassessment than a safe one, this is still an engrossing and useful book. Noggle 
convincingly demonstrates that the last two years of the Wilson Administration set the 
political, social, and economic pattern for the era ^kh followed. The 19208, with its 
conservatism and chauvinism, witnessed the continuation of trends already strikingly 
apparent before the decade began. 

Women in Defense Work During World War II: An Analysis of the Labor Problem and 
Women's Rights. By Chester W. Gregory. (New York: Exposition Press, 1974. Pp. xxii, 
243. $9.00.) This comprehensive and carefully researched study proves not only that women 
performed well as industrial workers during the Second World War but also that the con- 
flict constituted a watershed in the history of American women. Female equality was 
furthered by the wartime experience. Gregory covers recruitment of women workers, 
their training, their particular problems such as child care needs and their financial 
renumeration. He devotes special attention as well to females in agriculture and the role 
of the black woman. Although the book is somewhat stodgy, it is well organized and con- 
tains much valuable information. 

The title, Florida Pioneers and their Alabama, Georgia, Carolina, Maryland, and Vir- 
ginia Ancestors (Tallahassee: L'Avant Studios, 1974. Pp. xx, 500. $35.00.) may confuse 
some readers, but it is a remarkably well researched work concerning the Avant family 
where the compiler, David A. Avant, Jr. has used the services of top genealogical re- 
searchers who covered much of Florida, all the way up the Atlantic seaboard to Maryland 
and Pennsylvania, spanning 1619-1974. Thousands of names are listed in a very good 
index, but nearer to home there are studies by professionals on Avant, Britt, Hunter, 
Massey-Massie, Peake-Peck, Taliaferro, Tatum, Townsend and Underwood, all of Vir- 
ginia, and the Davis family of Maryland. The book may be ordered from David A. Avant, 
Jr., L'Avant Studios, 207 West Park Avenue, Tallahassee, Florida, 32301. Only 300 copies 
were printed and there is a good foreword by George E. Russell. [P. W. Filby ] 




Annapolis 1850s, courtesy of M. E Warren 



new this spring 

In Pursuit 
of Profit 

The Annapolis Merchants in the Era of 
the American Revolution 
EDWARD C. PAPENFUSE 
In a refreshing new perspective that 
focuses on Annapolis instead of Balti- 
more, Papenfuse examines the urban 
growth and economic development in 
the Chesapeake region in the later half 
of the 18th century. This is an up-close 
study of people, certain dynamic mer- 
chant families and partnerships of the 
time; how they adapted to changes in 
the tobacco trade and investment op- 
portunities during the war; and of 
their impact on the other businesses in 
the area. New in our series, Maryland 
Bicentennial Studies, illustrated, $12.00 



The Architecture of 
Maximilian Godefroy 

ROBERT L. ALEXANDER 

In 1805 within months of Maximilian Godefroy's arrival in Baltimore from 
France, he had begun construction of St. Mary's Chapel, the first Gothic 
Revival church built in the United States. The author here traces Godefroy's 
fourteen years of work in America, pointing to Godefro)^s masterful recon- 
ciliation of the blunt demands of the industrial age with the tastes of the 
ancien rigime. illustrated, $16.00 

A Matter of Allegiances 

M&ry!«na*iM 1650 to 1861 
WILLIAM }. EVITTS 

"The purpose of his book is not simply to present a chronicle of political 
events and party realignments during the explosive fifties. Instead, as the 
author puts it, his study is . . . political history seen as a rather precise kind of 
social history. It looks much more at the populace than at the politicians, 
because politics is valued here not as an end in itself, but for what it can tell 
about a diverse group of Americans. . . . Evitts succeeds admirably." — 
Maryland Historical Review $11.00 



^ JOHNS HOPKINS i^^ " ^*^ 



Press Baltimore, Md. 21218 



Publlsked 




950 pages 
66 illustrations 



MARYLAND: 

A HISTORY ~ 1632 -1974 

A balanced account of Maryland, treating early and more 
recent history equally with political, economic and 

social topics. ' 



Edited by Richard Walsh 

William Lloyd Fox 

Publisfml by MARYLAND 

HISTORICAL SOCIETY 



Price 



$12,50 (plus 50c sales tax for 
Maryland residents) and 60c for 
handling and postage. 



". . . momtmental work ..." Dr. Harry Bard, President 

Community College of Baltimore 

'T/ie authors skillfully bakmce mtional with important local 
developments in the slate's history."' 

Mary Dearing, Professor, Montgomery College 



CALVERT COUNTY, MARYLAND, WILLS, 1654-1700 
By Raymond B. Clark, Jr. and Sara Seth Clark 

With an Introduction by Mrs. Betty Worthington Briscoe 

Contains over 275 wills, indices to persons, witnesses, places and occupations 

Yellow cover with Seal of Calverl County 
109 pages $10.00 4% Md. sales tax, where applicable 

Order from 

Raymond B. Clark, Jr., Box 352, St. Michaels, Md. 21663 



FREDERICK COUNTY, MARYLAND, NATURALIZATIONS, 1799 1850 

By Raymond B. Clark, Jr. 

With an Introduction by the Hon. Edward S. Delaplaine 

Over 1200 names. Gives place of birth and ruler for European countries and West 
Indies. Important for small GerjuM priacipalities. Including witnesses. 

64 pages. Blue cover. $7.00 4% Md. sales tax, where applicable 

Order from 

Raymond B. Clark, Jr., Box 352, St. Michaels, Md. 21663 



. . a beautiful picture book of Harford County through the seasons." Maryland 
Historical Magazine, Fall, 1974 

Available at 

Preston's Stationery, 319 S. Main St., Bel Air, Md. 21014 



The history covers early Western Maryland, \730 1770; Joseph Chapline; Forts Cumberland and Frederick; 
French and Indian War; Antietam Iron Furnace; Churches; Swearingen Ferry; C. & O. Canal: Battle of 
Antietam; and many other topics of interest. 89 pages. $2.60, tax included. 

Also available 55 page book of References & Sources of Facts for all data presented in The History of 



HARFORD IMAGES 



$7.95 plus 
50fi mailing 



4% sales lax 

where applicable 



THE HISTOR Y OF SHARPSBURG, MAR YLAND 



By Lee D. Barron 



Sharpsburg, Maryland. 



$1.80, tax included. 



Order from 

BARRON'S - P. O. Box 356, Sharpsburg, Maryland. 21782 



What do you know about . . . 

The Carrolls of CarroUton The Griffiths of ancient lineage 

A Signer of the Declaration of Independence Descendants of Welsh kings and vigorous 

and leader in many fields leaders in the colony since 1675 

The Dorseys of Hockley-in-the-Hole Howkrfs of noble ancestry 

T-i. II J . / r n J 4 The county bears the name of tnis distm- 

The Howard County ancestors of President g^j^j,^^ aristocratic family 

Abraham Lincoln -t^u iiu » j-^- -i-j - i 

The Igleharts, distinguished in law 

The Ellicotts, founders of Ellicott and medicine 

City trace their Saxon lineage back to the Second 
Builders, manufacturers, planters, teachers, 

surveyor of Washington The Ridgelys of great distinction 

, <• ^< I -I, One of the most aristocratic and active fami- 

The Clarks of Clarksville li^s j„ the colony 

Planters, importers, soldiers, administrators jy^^ Worthingtons of WorthingtOn 

The Greenberrys of Whitehall Valley 

Leader in civil and military affairs, Governor In the colony since 1664, this family was active 
of Maryland 1692 and prominent in all its affairs 

— and several score other Maryland families who 
distinguished themselves in Howard County history 

Origin and History of Howard County 

383 pages, richly iHwstrated; 29 ^m^-^^rnm ef distiiiguished families in 
full color; 54 reviews of prominent families and 32 photographs of their resi- 
dences plus an ample bibliography and an extensive index. 

On sale direct from the author, Mr. Charles Francis Stein, 17 Midvale Road, 
Baltimore, Maryland 21210 @ $19.50 per copy, shipped postpaid. Where 
applicaMe 4% sali^ tax shotfM be added. 



VV1LL,1AM BUCKLAND. 1734 l-"4 
ARCHITECT OF VIRCIMA AND MARYLAND 

By Rosamond Randall Beirne and 
John Henry Scarff, F.A.l.A. 

Published by Maryland Historical Society, 1958 
A Book of great interest to architects, curators, librarians, presenationists of the 18ih Century 
110.00 plus 4% sales tax 

60« mailing where applicable 

Avaiiable at 

HAMMOND-HARVVOOD HOU.SE, AXXAPOLI.S. MARYLAND, 
AND MARYLAND HISTORICAL SOCIETY 



TRADITIONAL 
FURNITURE 

From America s mWanding 
sources . . . in wide open 
stock selection 

Complete interior planning 
and advisory service in the 
Williamsburg tradition 

FALLON 8c HELLEN 
11 and 13 W. Mulberry St. 
Baltimore, Md. 21201 
LExington 9-3345 



leiVGlIE, BROOKS 
& COMPMY 

INSURANCE 
Since 1898 



213 ST. PAUL PLACE 
BALTIMORE 




FINE OOLLECTION OF MTTIQUE FURNITOKE 
ANTIC3UES RESTORED, REFDHSHBD, AND REPROXJCED 
532 St. Paul Street Baltimore, Md. 21202 
Phone: 837-6919 



Enrico Llberti, Prop. 



nnouncing . . . 

A MAJOR EXHIBITION AND CATALOGUE 



FOUR GENERATIONS OF 
COMMISSIONS 

MARCH 3— JUNE 29, 1975 




THE PEALE COLLECTION 
OF THE Maryland Historical Society 

iOl WEST MONUMENT STREET, BALTIMORE, MARYLAND IIZOI 



A 200' page illustrated catalogue may be purchased at the Maryland Historical 
Society for $7-00 per copy (plus 28c sales tax). Mail orders $8.00 including 

postage and handling. 



ANTIQUES 
& 

FURNITURE 
RESTORATION 

since 1899 

J. W. BERRY & SON 

222 West Read Street 
Baltimore 
Saratoga 7-4687 




I 
I 
I 

I 



Consultants 
by Appointment to 
The Society 



1 Oil Paintings | 
Water Colors § 
Signed Gmphics 

Porcelains 
Laliqm Crystal 
Expert Conservation 
Correct Training 



THE 
PURNELL 
GALLERIES 

407 North Charles Street 



COLLECTORS' AUCTIONS 
CATALOG SALES 



of fine books, antiques, art works, letters & docu- 
ments, antique weapons. Receive fair prices through 
competitive bidding. Appraisals, judicial sales, 
estate sales conducted for intM^Mutls, executors 
and attorneys. 

Write for information concerning our catalog sub- 
scriptions, or phone {301 ) 728-7040 

HARRIS AUCTION GALLERIES 

873-875 N. HOWARD STKEET, BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 21201 



MEMBER: APPRAISERS ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA 

AUCTIONEERS ASSOCIATION OF MARYLAND 



The ^R^wmife 




Tli» Catottin .. Tltefl5AH-l.i Qcuil-" 
BaUisTiM-e . . all await ^eu 

Olney Xrtn^ 

OM yaulp 97 IK liisWic Obtw.MajyUnjoL 



For nearly 20 years the 
GENEALOGICAL 
PUBLISHING CO. 
has been actively reprinting 
out-of-print books on 

GENEALOGY 
LOCAL mSTORY 
HERALDRY 

Write for free catalogues. 

We also have a large stock 
of hooks on 

BRITISH GENEALOGY 

GENEALOGICAL 
PUBLISHING CO., INC. 
Regional Publishing Company, 
Affiliate 
521-523 St. Paul Place 
Baltimore, Maryland 21202 



RARE AMERICANA 



Paintings 

Prints 

Furniture 

Books 

Stamps 

BOUGHT 



Pewter 

China 

Bottles 

Documents 

Coins 

— SOLD — APPRAISED 



JAMES B. McCLOSKEY 

Member American Society of Appraisers 



6127 N. CiwilM Stnet 
Baltimore 



Phone: 



821-5959 



Bv Appointment (>nl\ 



CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING 



PHOTOGRAPHY Since 1878 Hughes Co. 

Copy and Restoration Work a Specialty. C. Gaither Scott 

felack and White or color. 115 E. 25th Street 

Phone: 889-5540 Baltimore, Md. 21218 

FAMILY COAT OF ARMS 
A Symbol Of Your Family's Heritage From The Proud Past 
Handpainted In Oils In Full Heraldic Colors — Size ni/2 X ^Vi — $18,00 
Research When Necessary 
Anna Dorsby Linder 
PINES OF HOCKLEY 

166 Defense Highway Annapolis, Maryland 21401 Phone: 263-3334 

PLUMBING — HEATING — AIR CONDITIONING 

M. NELSON BARNES & SONS, Inc. 
Established 1909 Phone: 666-9330 117 Oiurch Lane;, Cockeysville 21030 

IF your children do not want the family heirlooms, please let us help you. We have 
been finding good homes for handsome antiques since 1899, and we still do. 

J. W. Berry * Son— Baltimore— SAratoga 7-4687 



COATS OF ARMS 

Engraved on Silver 
Reproduced in Oil on Parchment 
Silver Repairing 

Phone: 828-8824 




GARAMOND/PRIDEMARK PRESS, INC. 

714 E. PMTT ST. BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 21202 ^ TEL: AREA COOE 301 727-7070 WASHINGTON TEL; S21-im 



A. CLARK REID, JR. 
139 C. Versailles Circle 
Baltimore, Md. 21204 



PUBLICATIONS 

Studies in Maryland History 



His Lordship's Patronage: Of/ices of Profit in Colonial Maryland. By Donnell M. Owings. 

1953 S 7.50 

Texts and References for School Use 

Maryland: A Students' Guide to Localized History. By Harold R. Manakee, 1968 $ 1.50 

The War of 1812 On The Chesapeake Ba\ . llluslrated paperback. By Gilbert Byron, 1964 ... S 2.00 

Mv Maryland. Bv Kaessmann. Manakee and Wheeler. Historv of Maryland, Revised edition. S 4.50 

Indians of Early Maryland. Bv Harold R. Manakee. 1959 . . .' S 2.00 

Maryland in the Civil War. By Harold R. Manakee. 1961 S 5.00 

Wheeler Leaflets on Maryland History. (24 titles) each S .10 

Master s Theses and Doctoral Dissertations on Maryland History. Richard R. Duncan and 

Dorothy M. Brown, comp. 1970 .' S 2.00 

Highlights of Maryland History as Presented in the Darnall Young People's Museum. 1973 . . S .75 

Miscellaneous 

The Manuscript Collections of the Maryland Historical Society. Avril J. M. Pedley. comp. 

1968 ■ S15.00 

A History of the University of Maryland. By George H. Callcott. Illustrated. 1966 S 7.50 

Qualcers in the Founding of Anne Arundel Caunty, Maryland. By J. Reaney Kelly. Illus- 

strated. 1963 S 5.50 

The Maryland Press. 1777 1790. By Joseph T. Wheeler. 1938 $15.00 

History of Queen Anne's County. Bv Frederic Emory. 1950 $ 7.50 

From Mill Wheel to Plowshare. Bv JuHa A. Drake and J. R. Orndorff. Orndorff Genealogy. 

Illustrated. 1938 $ 6.00 

Semmes and Kindred Families. By Harry Wright Newman. 1956 $12.50 

The Hollyday and Related Families of the Eastern Shore of Maryland. By James Bordley, Jr., 

M.D. ■|96'2 : ■ $12.50 

The Regimental Colors of the 175th Infantry {Fifth Maryland) By H. R. Manakee and Col. 

Roger S. Whitelord. 1959 S 2.00 

The E.xtinct Medical Schools of Baltimore. Maryland. Bv Harold J. Abrahams, lllu.struted, 

1969 S 10.00 

Quakerism on the Eastern Shore. By Kenneth Carroll. Illustrated. 1970 SI 2.50 

Joshua Johnston, the First American Negro Portrait Painter. Bv J. Hall Pleasants. Reprint. 

Illustrated. 1970 ' S 1.50 

Parade of Maryland Fashion. Catalog of costume exhibit, llluslrated. 1970 $ 3.25 

A. Hoen on Stone. By lot:. B. McCaule\ . Cataidiz of lithograph exhibition. Illustrated. 1969 . . S 3.00 

American and Bril/.sh (iencalocv. P. \\ I- ilh> . comp, 1970 $10.00 

Prince George's Heritage. By L.ouix Joyncr Hicnlon. ]972 $12.50 

Genealogical Research in Maryland A Guide 1972. hv .Marv Kevsor Meyer $ 4.50 

Star-Spangled Books. P. W. Filby and Edward G. Howard . . .' $12.50 

/ didn't know that! an exhibition of first happenings in Maryland. By Edgar Heyl. 1973 $ 3.00 

World War II 

Maryland in World War II: Vol. I, Miliiarv Participation, 1950; Vol. 11, Industry and Agri- 
culture. 1951; Vol. W . Gold Star Honor RolU 1956. H. R. Manakee, comp. . each $ 3.25 

History of the II 0th Field Artillery, with Sketches of Related Units. Bv Col. John P. Cooper. 

Jr. Illustrated. 1953 .' S 5.00 

Maryland in World War II — Register of Service Personnel, 5 vols each $20.00 



MARYL.\NI) HISTORICAL SOCIETY 



201 W. Monument Street 
Baltimore, Maryland 21201 



Postage and lax. 
if applicable, extra. 




STAR-SPANGLED BOOKS 

BOOKS, SHEET MUSIC, NEWSPAPERS, 
MANUSCRIPTS, AND PERSONS 
ASSOCIATED WITH 

"THE STAR-SPANGLED BANNER" 

Compiled by 

P. W. FILBY 
Director and Librarian, Maryland Historical Society 
AND 

EDWARD G. HOWARD 

Vice President and Consultant on Rare Books 
Marylarul Historical Society 




MARYLAND HISTORICAL SOCIETY 
BALTIMORE 
1972 



Available at the Society 
$12.50 plus postage and tax where applicable 



THE MANUSCRIPT COLLECTIONS 
OF THE 

MARYLAND HISTORICAL SOCIETY 

Compiled by Avril J. M. Pedley 
published in 1968 

1,724 manuscript collections of over 1,000,000 items, representing manu- 
scripts acquired from 1844 to 1968, are described in 390 pages, including a 
detailed index. 

The documents listed analytically in this volume provide a rich oppor- 
tunity for research in all areas of Maryland and often the nation's history. 
The business, economic, family, local, military, political, religious, and social 
history of Maryland are covered extensively. Although every significant era 
and topic of both Maryland and National history are represented in the 
manuscript holdinajs of the Maryland Historical Society, the collection is 
especially strong for the colonial and antebellum periods. The Manuscript 
Collections of the Maryland Historical Society is a necessary tool in every 
reference library. 

Price $15 (plus $.60 tax for Maryland residents) and $.50 postage and 
handling. 

Please address orders to: 

The Maryland Historical Society 
201 West Monumexit Street 
Baltimore, MaryliMul 21201 



MARYLAND ARCHIVES 

(1637- ) 

Complete run I through 72 {1883-1972) now available. 

% :{t :fc :ic 

72 volumes $895.00 

if if if * * 

Vols. 22-72 may be purchased separately 
at $10.00 
Vols. 1-21, price list upon request. 

if if if if if 

Prices do not include mailing costs. 

if if if if if 

Address orders: 

Maryland Historical Society 
201 W. Monument St. 
Baltimore, Md. 21201